Currently, I have online Journal article (DOI without Vol(Issue). pages) with some citations, views, and download information. One would like to upload new version of the same article as it is published with previous statistics preserved as basically both are the same article.
What I think is that one have to remove current article and upload new version, Since that would be new upload so statistics will be removed as well. I might be wrong in my current understanding so please guide me how to upload published article not as new upload but as new version of the current article to preserve its statistics.
With Best regards
There will be no difference in statistics as i have done this few times. Somehow u can edit the journal information concerning the volumes, issues etc.
This is about including vol issue and pp information by editing properties of current version. How about uploading new version and transferring stats with that one. Thanks
You may add the new version as a supplementary resource of the previous version. In this case the stats,downloads, reviews will be preserved.
Yes, I have been uploading the postprint as a supplementary resource, but that is of course not satisfactory since the postprint is the real deal, and not supplementary. It may take 1-4 years between the preprint and postprint. Waiting 1-4 years for the postprint in order to upload is not satisfactory. I posted the same question to Researchgate Help ten days ago, May 17, 2016, referring to RePec https://ideas.repec.org/e/psh93.html which enables arbitraily many earlier versions of a publication. No reply so far. My exact question was as follows: “Why does uploading a preprint preclude subsequently uploading a postprint, unless I have misunderstood? I just uploaded a postprint of a paper as a dataset (which makes no sense) since I discovered that my coauthor prematurely uploaded an inferior preprint a long time ago. I suggest allowing several versions of a paper, as on https://ideas.repec.org/e/psh93.html , where eight or more different versions may be present, typically as working papers from the institutions of the various coauthors. Am I missing something?” I speculate that some red tape or legal issues or formal issues may be present, e.g. that authors may upload entirely different postprints and thus incorrectly transfer statistics to the postprint. For example, if others refer to page and line numbers in the first upload, that reference will be incorrect if the postprint has different page and line numbers. Issues like these can be sorted out, e.g. by enabling version 1, 2, 3, 4,…., n-1, postprint. I would like to see a professionally reasoned answer to this question. In any event, I am going to upload a preprint to an accepted paper right now. Researchgate offers no opportunity to upload as e.g. “version 1”. The journal has published it online before my proof reading. I have completed proof reading, and that's the full text I upload. I suspect it will take a few months until I get a new version with my proof corrections. Thereafter I suspect it will take 1-4 years for the postprint to be available. Yes, I can upload these two subsequent versions as "supplementary resource". This is really confusing for readers. Readers may find one old version as fulltext, and 15 subsequent versions as additional resource, and finally the postprint as version 16 and also as a "supplementary resource". At least the linguistics should be changed. The postprint is not a "supplementary resource".
I have the same problem - I had a simple "presentation" (transcript of an online lecture) which I've now had edited. There's no point keeping the original informal document, I just want to replace it, without losing the statistics attached the earlier one.
To my knowledge Researchgate has not resolved this issue, e.g. by enabling version 1, 2, 3, 4,…., n-1, postprint.
I also have noticed this problem and yes, it has not solved so far... :( In my case I just delete the preprint or previous version of the paper and upload anew the final postprint. It's not a good solution but I did not find anything better. My main argument is that if the reader comes across my preprint, he can think that the paper is still a preprint and re-use/cite it as a preprint which would be wrong. In once case one of my papers lost certain amount of 'Reads' (ca. 70 to be correct) , while its post-print started counting from scratch... It's a pity indeed. Let's hope RG will solve this problem soon.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations