Background: Since 2013, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of preprint servers available online. To date, little is known about the position of researchers, funders, research performing organisations and other stakeholders with respect to this fast-paced landscape. In this article, we explore the benefits and challenges of preprint posting, along with issues such as infrastructure and financial sustainability. We also discuss the definition of a 'preprint' in different communities, and the impact this has on further uptake. Methods: This study is based on 38 detailed semi-structured interviews of key stakeholders based on a purposive heterogeneous sampling approach. Interviews were undertaken between October 2018 and January 2019. These were recorded, transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis to identify trends. Interview questions were designed based on Innovation Diffusion Theory, which is also used to interpret the results of this study. Results: Our study is the first using empirical data to understand the new wave of preprint servers and found that early and fast dissemination is the most appealing feature of the practice. The main concerns are related to the lack of quality assurance and the 'Ingelfinger rule'. We identified trust as an essential enabler of preprint posting and stress the enabling role of Twitter in showcasing preprints and enabling comments on these. Conclusions: The preprints landscape is evolving fast and disciplinary communities are at different stages in the innovation diffusion process. The landscape is characterised by significant experimentation, which leads to the conclusion that a one-size-fits-all approach to preprints is not feasible. Cooperation and active engagement between the stakeholders involved will play an important role in the future. In our paper, we share questions for the further development of the preprints landscape, with the most important being whether preprint posting will develop as a publisher- or researcher-centric practice. Copyright:
Background: Since 2013, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of preprint servers available online. To date, little is known about the position of researchers, funders, research performing organisations and other stakeholders with respect to this fast-paced landscape. In this article, we explore the benefits and challenges of preprint posting, along with issues such as infrastructure and financial sustainability. We also discuss the definition of a 'preprint' in different communities, and the impact this has on further uptake. Methods: This study is based on 38 detailed semi-structured interviews of key stakeholders based on a purposive heterogeneous sampling approach. Interviews were undertaken between October 2018 and January 2019. These were recorded, transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis to identify trends. Interview questions were designed based on Innovation Diffusion Theory, which is also used to interpret the results of this study. Results: Our study is the first using empirical data to understand the new wave of preprint servers and found that early and fast dissemination is the most appealing feature of the practice. The main concerns are related to the lack of quality assurance and the 'Ingelfinger rule'. We identified trust as an essential enabler of preprint posting and stress the enabling role of Twitter in showcasing preprints and enabling comments on these. Conclusions: The preprints landscape is evolving fast and disciplinary communities are at different stages in the innovation diffusion process. The landscape is characterised by significant experimentation, which leads to the conclusion that a one-size-fits-all approach to preprints is not feasible. Cooperation and active engagement between the stakeholders involved will play an important role in the future. In our paper, we share questions for the further development of the preprints landscape, with the most important being whether preprint posting will develop as a publisher- or researcher-centric practice. Copyright:
Authors: Kennedy W Mwangi; Nyabuti Mainye; Daniel O Ouso; Kevin Esoh; Angela W Muraya; Charles K Mwangi; Careen Naitore; Pauline Karega; Gilbert Kibet-Rono; Sebastian Musundi; Jennifer Mutisya; Elizabeth Mwangi; Cavin Mgawe; Silviane Miruka; Caleb K Kibet Journal: Front Res Metr Anal Date: 2021-05-13
Authors: Barbara Clyne; Kieran A Walsh; Eamon O'Murchu; Melissa K Sharp; Laura Comber; Kirsty K O' Brien; Susan M Smith; Patricia Harrington; Michelle O'Neill; Conor Teljeur; Máirín Ryan Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Cassandra L Ettinger; Madhumala K Sadanandappa; Kıvanç Görgülü; Karen L Coghlan; Kenneth K Hallenbeck; Iratxe Puebla Journal: Biol Open Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 2.643
Authors: Gabriela F Nane; Nicolas Robinson-Garcia; François van Schalkwyk; Daniel Torres-Salinas Journal: Scientometrics Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 3.801
Authors: David N Nicholson; Vincent Rubinetti; Dongbo Hu; Marvin Thielk; Lawrence E Hunter; Casey S Greene Journal: PLoS Biol Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 8.029