On the origin of nonequivalent states: how we can talk about preprints
Abstract
Increasingly, preprints are at the center of conversations across the research ecosystem. But disagreements remain about the role they play. Do they \"count\" for research assessment? Is it ok to post preprints in more than one place? In this paper, we argue that these discussions often conflate two separate issues, the history of the manuscript and the status granted it by different communities. In this paper, we propose a new model that distinguishes the characteristics of the object, its \"state\", from the subjective \"standing\" granted to it by different communities. This provides a way to discuss the difference in practices between communities, which will deliver more productive conversations and facilitate negotiation on how to collectively improve the process of scholarly communications not only for preprints but other forms of scholarly contributions.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- From amazing work to I beg to differ - analysis of bioRxiv preprints that received one public comment till September 2019
M. Malicki, J. Costello, … L. A. Maggio·bioRxiv·Oct 14, 2020
- Peer review and preprint policies are unclear at most major journals
T. Klebel, S. Reichmann, … T. Ross-Hellauer·bioRxiv·Jan 24, 2020
- Has the time come for preprints in biology?
Needhi Bhalla·bioRxiv·Mar 26, 2016
- Biomedical researchers use preprints for speed, but hesitate to credit them in evaluation
Xi Hong, B. Ian Hutchins, Chaoqun Ni·bioRxiv·Sep 10, 2026
- Preprint solicitation as a natural experiment in scholarly publishing
Małgorzata Anna Gazda, Haoran Cai, … Shalene Singh-Shepherd·bioRxiv·Oct 28, 2026
- The Preprint Club - A cross-institutional, community-based approach to peer reviewing
F. C. Richter, E. Gea-Mallorqui, … N. Vabret·bioRxiv·Jan 4, 2023