IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v7y2019i2p44-d240430.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying the Growth of Preprint Services Hosted by the Center for Open Science

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Narock

    (Center for Data, Mathematical and Computational Sciences, Goucher College, Baltimore, MD 21204, USA)

  • Evan B. Goldstein

    (Department of Geography, Environment and Sustainability, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Graham Building, 1009 Spring Garden St., Greensboro, NC 27412, USA)

Abstract

A wide range of disciplines are building preprint services—web-based systems that enable publishing non peer-reviewed scholarly manuscripts before publication in a peer-reviewed journal. We have quantitatively surveyed nine of the largest English language preprint services offered by the Center for Open Science (COS) and available through an Application Programming Interface. All of the services we investigate also permit the submission of postprints, non-typeset versions of peer-reviewed manuscripts. Data indicates that all services are growing, but with submission rates below more mature services (e.g., bioRxiv). The trend of the preprint-to-postprint ratio for each service indicates that recent growth is a result of more preprint submissions. The nine COS services we investigate host papers that appear in a range of peer-reviewed journals, and many of these publication venues are not listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals. As a result, COS services function as open repositories for peer-reviewed papers that would otherwise be behind a paywall. We further analyze the coauthorship network for each COS service, which indicates that the services have many small connected components, and the largest connected component encompasses only a small percentage of total authors on each service. When comparing the papers submitted to each service, we observe topic overlap measured by keywords self-assigned to each manuscript, indicating that search functionalities would benefit from cutting across the boundaries of a single service. Finally, though annotation capabilities are integrated into all COS services, it is rarely used by readers. Our analysis of these services can be a benchmark for future studies of preprint service growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Narock & Evan B. Goldstein, 2019. "Quantifying the Growth of Preprint Services Hosted by the Center for Open Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-14, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:7:y:2019:i:2:p:44-:d:240430
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/2/44/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/2/44/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Desjardins-Proulx & Ethan P White & Joel J Adamson & Karthik Ram & Timothée Poisot & Dominique Gravel, 2013. "The Case for Open Preprints in Biology," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-5, May.
    2. Matthew Cobb, 2017. "The prehistory of biology preprints: A forgotten experiment from the 1960s," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Sarvenaz Sarabipour & Humberto J Debat & Edward Emmott & Steven J Burgess & Benjamin Schwessinger & Zach Hensel, 2019. "On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-12, February.
    4. Jeffrey M. Perkel, 2015. "Annotating the scholarly web," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7580), pages 153-154, December.
    5. B. Preedip Balaji & M. Dhanamjaya, 2019. "Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-23, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Zhiqi & Chen, Yue & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2020. "Preprints as accelerator of scholarly communication: An empirical analysis in Mathematics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    2. Josephat U. Izunobi, 2024. "On the Thorny Issue of Single Submission," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-5, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Olivier Pourret & Dasapta Erwin Irawan & Jonathan P. Tennant, 2020. "On the Potential of Preprints in Geochemistry: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-6, April.
    2. Jonathan P. Tennant & Harry Crane & Tom Crick & Jacinto Davila & Asura Enkhbayar & Johanna Havemann & Bianca Kramer & Ryan Martin & Paola Masuzzo & Andy Nobes & Curt Rice & Bárbara Rivera-López & Tony, 2019. "Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-24, May.
    3. Vincent Raoult, 2020. "How Many Papers Should Scientists Be Reviewing? An Analysis Using Verified Peer Review Reports," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, January.
    4. Doyle, Cathal, 2020. "How Can I Share My Work? A Review of the Open Access Policies of IS Journals," OSF Preprints xr8mv, Center for Open Science.
    5. Christopher Allen & David M A Mehler, 2019. "Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-14, May.
    6. Constantin Bürgi & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2021. "Working Paper, Journalartikel und Zitierungen: Eine empirische Analyse für die Top-5-Zeitschriften in der Volkswirtschaftslehre," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 74(02), pages 51-54, February.
    7. Montathar Faraon & Agnieszka Jaff & Liegi Paschoalini Nepomuceno & Victor Villavicencio, 2020. "Fake News and Aggregated Credibility: Conceptualizing a Co-Creative Medium for Evaluation of Sources Online," International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence (IJACI), IGI Global, vol. 11(4), pages 93-117, October.
    8. Akbaritabar, Aliakbar & Stephen, Dimity & Squazzoni, Flaminio, 2022. "A study of referencing changes in preprint-publication pairs across multiple fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    9. Alexandra Baumann & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2020. "Where have all the working papers gone? Evidence from four major economics working paper series," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2433-2441, September.
    10. Mario Malički & IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg & Lex Bouter & Gerben ter Riet, 2019. "Journals’ instructions to authors: A cross-sectional study across scientific disciplines," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    11. Sarvenaz Sarabipour & Humberto J Debat & Edward Emmott & Steven J Burgess & Benjamin Schwessinger & Zach Hensel, 2019. "On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-12, February.
    12. Montathar Faraon & Agnieszka Jaff & Liegi Paschoalini Nepomuceno & Victor Villavicencio, 2020. "Fake News and Aggregated Credibility: Conceptualizing a Co-Creative Medium for Evaluation of Sources Online," International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence (IJACI), IGI Global, vol. 11(4), pages 1-25, October.
    13. Klaus Wohlrabe & Constantin Bürgi, 2021. "What is the benefit from publishing a working paper in a journal in terms of citations? Evidence from economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4701-4714, June.
    14. Joaquín Gayoso-Cabada & María Goicoechea-de-Jorge & Mercedes Gómez-Albarrán & Amelia Sanz-Cabrerizo & Antonio Sarasa-Cabezuelo & José-Luis Sierra, 2019. "Ontology-Enhanced Educational Annotation Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-22, August.
    15. Shir Aviv-Reuven & Ariel Rosenfeld, 2021. "Publication patterns’ changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal and short-term scientometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6761-6784, August.
    16. Thomas Klebel & Stefan Reichmann & Jessica Polka & Gary McDowell & Naomi Penfold & Samantha Hindle & Tony Ross-Hellauer, 2020. "Peer review and preprint policies are unclear at most major journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, October.
    17. Marc Bertin & Iana Atanassova, 2022. "Preprint citation practice in PLOS," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6895-6912, December.
    18. Ivan Kodvanj & Jan Homolak & Davor Virag & Vladimir Trkulja, 2022. "Publishing of COVID-19 preprints in peer-reviewed journals, preprinting trends, public discussion and quality issues," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1339-1352, March.
    19. Ahmad Yaman Abdin & Muhammad Jawad Nasim & Yannick Ney & Claus Jacob, 2021. "The Pioneering Role of Sci in Post Publication Public Peer Review (P4R)," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, March.
    20. Klaus Wohlrabe & Constantin Bürgi, 2021. "Do working papers increase journal citations? Evidence from the top 5 journals in economics," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(17), pages 1531-1535, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:7:y:2019:i:2:p:44-:d:240430. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.