Research on Research Institute (RoRI), London, United Kingdom.
Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
PeerJ. 2023 Aug 22;11:e15864. doi: 10.7717/peerj.15864. eCollection 2023.
The COVID-19 pandemic caused a rise in preprinting, triggered by the need for open and rapid dissemination of research outputs. We surveyed authors of COVID-19 preprints to learn about their experiences with preprinting their work and also with publishing their work in a peer-reviewed journal. Our research had the following objectives: 1. to learn about authors' experiences with preprinting, their motivations, and future intentions; 2. to consider preprints in terms of their effectiveness in enabling authors to receive feedback on their work; 3. to compare the impact of feedback on preprints with the impact of comments of editors and reviewers on papers submitted to journals. In our survey, 78% of the new adopters of preprinting reported the intention to also preprint their future work. The boost in preprinting may therefore have a structural effect that will last after the pandemic, although future developments will also depend on other factors, including the broader growth in the adoption of open science practices. A total of 53% of the respondents reported that they had received feedback on their preprints. However, more than half of the feedback was received through "closed" channels-privately to the authors. This means that preprinting was a useful way to receive feedback on research, but the value of feedback could be increased further by facilitating and promoting "open" channels for preprint feedback. Almost a quarter of the feedback received by respondents consisted of detailed comments, showing the potential of preprint feedback to provide valuable comments on research. Respondents also reported that, compared to preprint feedback, journal peer review was more likely to lead to major changes to their work, suggesting that journal peer review provides significant added value compared to feedback received on preprints.
新型冠状病毒肺炎（COVID-19）大流行期间，学术文献的预印本数量有所增加，这是因为需要对研究成果进行公开、快速传播。我们对 COVID-19 预印本的作者进行了调查，以了解他们在预印其作品方面的经验，以及在同行评审期刊上发表作品的经验。我们的研究有以下目标：1. 了解作者预印的经验、动机和未来意图；2. 考虑预印本在使作者能够收到对其工作的反馈方面的有效性；3. 将预印本反馈的影响与编辑和审稿人对提交给期刊的论文的评论的影响进行比较。在我们的调查中，78%的预印本新采用者表示打算也预印他们未来的工作。因此，尽管未来的发展还将取决于其他因素，包括开放科学实践的更广泛采用，但预印本的激增可能会产生结构性影响，这种影响将持续到疫情之后。共有 53%的受访者报告说他们收到了对其预印本的反馈。然而，超过一半的反馈是通过“封闭”渠道——私下提供给作者的。这意味着预印本是一种接收研究反馈的有用方式，但通过促进和推广预印本反馈的“开放”渠道，可以进一步提高反馈的价值。受访者收到的反馈中近四分之一是详细的评论，这表明预印本反馈有可能对研究提供有价值的评论。受访者还报告说，与预印本反馈相比，期刊同行评审更有可能导致他们的工作发生重大变化，这表明与预印本反馈相比，期刊同行评审提供了显著的附加价值。
