Science publishing, preprinting, and Open Access
Preprints:
Biological research in Papua New Guinea: a publication activity analysis
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.25.457669v1
This preprint describes patterns in biological research publications from Papua New Guinea with the objective of identifying ways to improve output in the future. As a country in the Global South, looking at ways to increase research output from Papua New Guinea is both important and relevant to current publishing initiatives involving Open Access and Plan S.
The rapid, massive growth of COVID-19 authors in the scientific literature
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.15.422900v3
The COVID-19 pandemic has been hugely impactful on the preprinting landscape, with research related to SARS-CoV-2 driving a spike in preprints deposited on bioRxiv and medRxiv. This preprint looks at authors and subfields of science involved with COVID-19 related papers, and describes a unique example of massive output and involvement of the scientific workforce.
Transparency in peer review: Exploring the content and tone of reviewers’ confidential comments to editors
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.454037v1
More recently, the ‘traditional’ peer review of scientific manuscripts has come under criticism for possible bias and lack of transparency. As more open alternatives to the traditional single-blind peer review (where the identity of the authors is known to the reviewers, but the reviewers are not known to the authors) become more common, the persistence of the confidential reviewer to editor comment option poses a possible problem for reviewer-author transparency. This preprint investigates how confidential comments are used by reviewers of manuscripts that are rejected. Check out the preLights post of this preprint here.
Woman Authorship in Pre-print Versus Peer-Reviewed Oral Health-Related Publications: A Two-Year Observational Study
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.25.449988v2
Preprints present the opportunity to ‘level the scientific playing field’ for both authors and readers. How does preprint usage differ between male and female authors? This preprint investigates preprint usage by female authors in oral health related research and finds a reduced uptake compared to male authors. Read the preLights highlight of this preprint here.
Analysis of scientific journalism in Nature reveals gender and regional disparities in coverage
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.21.449261v1
How scientists are represented and quoted in the media is crucial to public opinion of both scientists themselves and scientific research. In this preprint, the authors look at the gender and geographical location of scientists who are quoted in Nature journalism articles, compared to the gender and geographical location of authors on papers published in Nature as research articles.
I, We and They: A Linguistic and Narrative Exploration of the Authorship Process
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.14.448236v1
Science – and science publications – are largely a team effort, but navigating ownership of work on academic papers is often a difficult task. In this preprint, the authors examine how language is used to portray agency on multi-author papers.
Reducing publication delay to improve the efficiency and impact of conservation science
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.30.437223v2
The delay between manuscript submission and final publication is notoriously long, and this is true across scientific research. In this preprint, the authors examine publication delay in conservation science research, a field that is particularly important with regards urgency of action. These findings are relevant not just to this area of biology, but across the science publishing landscape.
Gender and geographical disparity in editorial boards of journals in psychology and neuroscience
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.15.431321v1
Unequal representation of gender and geographical diversity is true for many, if not all, aspects of scientific research and publishing. Here, the authors of the preprint look at gender and geographical location of editors of psychology and neuroscience related journals.
Motivations, concerns and selection biases when posting preprints: a survey of bioRxiv authors
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.07.459259v1
preLights is all about preprints! But why are authors motivated to post a preprint in the first place? This manuscript looks at the reasons why researchers choose (or decide not to) post their new work on bioRxiv.
Free for all, or free-for-all? A content analysis of Australian university open access policies
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.20.457045v2
Open access research in Australia appears to be lagging, with a lack of open access policies across Australian universities and research institutions. This preprint looks at the language and content of open access policies to better understand how this might be improved for authors and readers of research alike.
An exploratory analysis of 4844 withdrawn articles and their retraction notes
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.30.462625v2
We know that the peer review process is not infallible, and the retraction of scientific manuscripts by journals is not uncommon. Here, the authors look at the reasons for and implications of research retracted between 2009 and 2020.
Open Access publishing in Medicine: lights and shadows
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.08.467687v1
Open Access (OA) publishing is becoming increasingly common in many scientific disciplines. This preprint investigates the growing rate, geographical distribution and impact of OA and non-OA medical journals.
Gender Imbalance in the Editorial Activities of a Researcher-led Journal
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.09.467796v1
How does imbalance in gender representation impact editorial decisions in science publishing? This preprint investigates gender imbalance and gender homophily in the editorial activities, and finds that men are often over-represented and over-engaged in editorial activities.
Scholar Metrics Scraper (SMS): automated retrieval of citation and author data
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.473883v1
Here, the authors describe a new tool to automate the retrieval of bibliometric data to measure research impact.
Correction of the scientific production: publisher performance evaluation using a dataset of 4844 PubMed retractions
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.23.477400v4
The withdrawal of scientific papers after they have been formally published is one mechanism used by journals to correct published literature. In this preprint, the authors investigate the reasons for retracting papers across 1767 journals over an eleven-year time period, and conclude that implementing universal publishing standards and appropriate quality control could help improve the standards of published literature.
Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.03.479041v1
The COVID-19 pandemic brought a huge increase to the number of preprints deposited and downloaded from preprint servers. It also meant that preprints were reported much more prevalently than before the pandemic. In this preprint, the authors investigate how the pandemic has shifted journalist’s perception of preprints and their use in mainstream media.
Posted on: 7 September 2021 , updated on: 24 February 2022
(No Ratings Yet)