Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha

I partially agree with the answer of my professor Frank T. Edelmann . According to my opinion, I do not recommend the utilization of the preprint option and the avoid of this is better than the use of it.

Regards

Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha, I think that the answer to this question depends largely on the area of research. In our field of research (chemistry) preprints play only a minor role. Personally, we never uploaded any pre-print in a repository. However, I know that e.g. in mathematics pre-prints are extremely important.

Thank you Prof. Frank T. Edelmann for sharing your valuable experience.

Dear Mr. Nand Lal Kushwaha ,

I agree with professor Frank T. Edelmann . Personally, I prefer not to cite preprints. Anyway, if there are no restrictions you may cite it if needed.

Best regards,

Dr. Vardan Atoyan

I think it is kind of difficult to cite pre-prints, as basically speaking I have some doubts how to that. At the same time, it is worth adding a pre-print to launch a discussion and prepare a better draft for the publication.

Personally, I find pre-prints rather problematic. In the process submitting a manuscript to an international, peer-reviewed journal, you are normally asked if the paper has already been published elsewhere. What if a pre-print of this manuscript has previously been uploaded in a repository? Should I then answer with "YES" and risk complications?

Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha

I partially agree with the answer of my professor Frank T. Edelmann . According to my opinion, I do not recommend the utilization of the preprint option and the avoid of this is better than the use of it.

Regards

As far as I remember, we never cited a pre-print. As soon as a manuscript has been accepted, most reputable journals post it as "Accepted Manuscript". From then on it can be regularly cited as it has a DOI already.

Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha, Frank T. Edelmann and others members,

I agree with all opinions, just exposing different points of view.

I think the useful idea behind the pre-prints is the attribution of credits for innovative ideas at first to the original researcher.

I have very, unfortunately, seem in the last years, that the long time for publishing associated with the bad behavior of some referees (nowadays, with predatory publishing sites, anyone acts as referee, not the only ones with expertise and experiences to do so), are giving rise to very suspicious behavior on publishing innovative results, see the significative number of retreats.

I want to be wrong at this point; however, it is not what we have seen.

I personally also consider it somewhat problematic to cite the pre-print manuscript, as they are arriving in a very unfinished way. Fortunately, at present, it is not generally true; many of them are quite polished.

However, the pressure to publish, the numerology behind it is quickly changing the good into a complicated idea, the pre-prints publishing.

Best regards

WNM

Dr. Vardan Atoyan, Dr. Ruben Elamiryan, Dr. Yasser Fakri Mustafa, and Dr. Wagner Da Nova Mussel I appreciate your answers. Thank you for sharing your experiences.

Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha

Thank you for your question also.

All the best

I think this is not a good idea.

It is better to wait until it gets published.

Thank you, Dr. Ehsan Teymouri for sharing your thought.

Dear Joshua O. Ighalo, I appreciate your opinion.

Personnaly, I don't cite pre-print papers.

Dear Readers,

Interesting topic. Let's put it in a context.

When someone published your work as a technical report at a university or a research organisation, do you think it's a publication?

Dear Quan Hoang Nguyen, I would agree that this is certainly a publication, and many researchers would add it to their list of publications. It depends on your personal standards. To me, a technical report at a university or a research organization is not a full fledged publication. In my list of publications, I only counted papers in international, peer-reviewed journals.

Although pre-print repositories have become quite popular recently, I fully agree with Joshua O. Ighalo in this point. You can upload anything as pre-print, but it's not trustworthy science until it has been peer-reviewed.

Dear Frank T. Edelmann and Readers,

Thanks for sharing your opinions.

Readers in thread may be interested in the following thread:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_cite_a_technical_report

Just want to know your opinions about what a publication is and whether to to cite something or not.

Some universities require students and staffs to cite any existing work that is related to your work. But it appears that some universities may not. Is the latter a common standard?

Making pre-prints available helps spot potential problems/typos before a paper gets published. I think a working paper or a technical report is not exactly the same as a pre-print. Some working papers or technical reports never get published in a journal, but the ideas are still important and authors' contribution still needs to be credited accordingly. So, in my view, citing such sources as working paper or technical reports is not a problem. The major problem with a source is that at some point it can become unavailable to readers, that's why pre-prints must be treated carefully. But there are many articles published in well-known journals that cite working papers.

Andrey Davydenko Agree with your point. "but the ideas are still important and authors' contribution still needs to be credited accordingly".

But it is widely seen that mainstream conferences do not often cite working papers (TR, preprints). Only some people do cite. There is a gap in the standards that are being applied.

Aneeba Rashid

Yes, pre-printed articles may be cited or used to accomplish research projects in time as nowadays, the majority of the journals are made available online accessible and later on in print version. All these articles that appeared online as well as in print-version are peer-reviewed. What is the use of making accessible manuscripts electronically prior to the print version?

Dear Ram Prakash Dixit, every decent journal tries to make exciting research publicly available as early as possible. Nowadays it is possible to publish accepted articles online just a few days after the corrected proofs have been returned to the Editorial Office. In contrast, it often takes weeks or even months until the printed version is available. This is why it is really valuable to make the papers available online prior to the print version.

Dear sir Nand Lal Kushwaha hope this will help.

Why do authors post preprints?

"In some disciplines, like physics and mathematics, preprints have been a well-established part of the research process. However, preprints are becoming increasingly popular across academia and there has been a recent proliferation of preprint services in a number of disciplines from biomedicine to law. The benefit of preprints is primarily speed. Because preprints are not peer reviewed, they can be made available online very rapidly. This helps authors establish primacy with their research and also makes their research available to the community quickly. Furthermore, authors can sometimes receive feedback on their preprints prior to submitting to a journal, which allows them to improve their papers before submission."- source: Advance preprints

Dear Marcelino Lunag Jr, I know that e.g. in mathematics preprints play an important role. However, to me one question remains: Will journals accept a manuscript as a "New Submission" when it has been deposited as a preprint prior to submission?

Dear Frank T. Edelmann , I think some journals allow preprints before submission, and I quote "While most journals allow this, some journals do not allow submissions from papers that are already available on a preprint server. It is important to check the submission guidelines of the journal you plan to submit to so you can ensure the journal doesn't have a policy against this" -source, Advance preprints

Dear Marcelino Lunag Jr, thank you. So one should carefully check the journal policy in advance.

Regarding the point that someone made previously "it's not trustworthy science until it has been peer-reviewed", it is only shown that either the persons cannot judge the work by him/herself, or it's part of the standards one is pursuing. Higher education courses do expect to cite any piece of previous work (in the past people even cited private communication letter, etc). But it seems only some follow the rules. It appears that it's not applicable to some professors, they even dont cite related publications in their grant applications, etc.

Thank you, everyone, for a wonderful discussion and for sharing your valuable comments. Dr. Frank T. Edelmann, Quan Hoang Nguyen, Aneeba Rashid

I agree with the points made by Quan Hoang Nguyen . Especially in that " in the past people even cited private communication letter, etc ". Unfortunately, nowadays many university workers will try to use every opportunity to "scoop" (stealing other people's ideas) from any places available. In this regard, let me recommend this paper:

Article Is Your Idea Safe?

If something "it's not trustworthy science until it has been peer-reviewed " then you must not use it in your paper and then you are not obliged to cite. But if you use a method you found in a pre-print or elsewhere (e.g., a Ph.D. thesis) and you want to use the method but you do not want to cite the original source then this is a crime in academia.

Several days ago I found a pre-print where a method I proposed in my Ph.D. thesis was used without making any references to the thesis. In other words, the method was plagiarized.

In my comments to the pre-print I explained how the method was plagiarized from my Ph.D. thesis:

Article Automatic robust estimation for exponential smoothing: Persp...

In the comments section you can also see a reply by one of the authors essentially saying that they are not citing the thesis because there was a paper following the thesis that did not include the method. I think this is an absurd explanation since if authors are using a method proposed somewhere then they need to cite the place where they took the method from. Otherwise the readers of a paper will mistakenly assume that the method was proposed by the paper that did not cite the original source.

Dear Aneeba Rashid

Dear Aneeba Rashid

Dear Aneeba Rashid

Unfortunately, in the case I described above it even did not help that I published my method in my Ph.D. thesis (and it was one of the major contributions of the thesis, as was explicitly described in the corresponding section of the thesis). The method was still plagiarized..

Dear Aneeba Rashid

Dear Andrey Davydenko, wasn't it possible to publish the main results before you submitted your thesis, e.g. as Short Communication? If not, your supervisor should be blamed for the problem.

Dear Aneeba Rashid

1) Before submitting my thesis I submitted a paper containing the most important methods proposed in the thesis (but not everything: the thesis contained additional materials that were not included in the paper).

2) Now some people who worked in the same uni took the methods from my thesis that were not published in the paper and present these methods as their own contributions.

Fortunately, I have the abstract freely available online from the British Library + in one journal the same people referenced the thesis itself (which they now refuse to cite), which proves the authors knew the contents of the thesis.

More evidence and facts about what happened can be found, for example, in the comments section for this paper (as I describe in the comments section, this paper contains the plagiarized materials) :

Article Optimising forecasting models for inventory planning

The comments there also describe the fact of an unfair acquisition of scientific credit.

Dear Andrey Davydenko, this is indeed rather unfortunate!

Opinion on this is thorny, documentation in the research is important and necessary. Also, completing the research and making it completely mature is one of the basics of the research. But opinion differs completely in crises as we are now in the pandemic of the virus. The first researchers are tired of formulating the shape of the research paper to reach what we are, but we must develop it to meet the speed and help us in this method of artificial intelligence. Finally, I have never used an incomplete research

Dear Aneeba Rashid

No, I have never cited a pre-print paper. I think it is a way to publish results early possibly also due to the fear that another researcher / team may publish similar results earlier. Another idea is to get the content for all for free.

The final paper may end up behind a paywall. So this would be a matter of Open Access/open science vs. Closed circles of science...

Dear Carsten Weerth ,

I tend to disagree with your comment. But it's perhaps the common opinion of the academia. Sometimes, what was taught at uni is not what the people there actually follows. Strongly disagree with the idea that "Another idea is to get the content for all for free". Many people tend to have a double-standard.

Dear Andrey Davydenko , Aneeba Rashid

Thanks for sharing interesting discussions. The case is similar to mine on the year, as they hid my thesis under the dark and freely used for their grants, talks, and prizes. My papers were there in previous years, but they can still use it freely and silently, and then block the idea's originator. From experience, some "professors" do the tricks all the time, they do that to anyone. I posted the questions and projects to survey researchers around the world about this subject. If you're interested in, I can post the link here.

Dear Carsten Weerth and Readers,

For full context of Carsten's posts, please see the link: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_cite_a_technical_report.

Sorry, I missed your other comments over there. You tend to cite almost everything, that's great.

It's just the definition of pre-print papers that need to be clear.

Regarding Open Access/open science vs. Closed circles of science, it is an interesting topic and there are active threads that people are discussing about it.

Senior academia and professors tend to support the closed access. It is because, they get used to it. The benefits of closed access (or pay to publish, pay to access) for them is that it's easier to keep young researchers to get out of the loop. Andrey's story is an example.

To support closed access, a simple rule is used: closed access publications should only cite closed access publications.

Reviews for conferences and journals are mostly free by voluntary researchers (as I did many years btw), so why do people need to pay for access/publish?

The question is, if open access has peer reviewed papers, will the main players be open to open access as their benefits may be gone?

I think it is not a good idea to upload a manuscript in the pre-print repository before published in the journal

No, I have never cited a pre-print paper.

Dear Ahmed Ismail Ebada , can you please share the reason?

I repost this answer here because it touches part of this topic in an unknown angle...

I have just realized that a highly esteemed and creditable collegue has published his socicial science paper online in an OA journal by a publisher that is considered to be predatory. They charge 970 US$ per publication: Science Publishing Group and the Journal is called Humanities and the Social Sciences... http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/apcs?journalid=208 There are a couple of thoughts in my mind (also after reading the arguments/points given on the Frontiers series): - The publication is readily available and visible, - If you are on the bealls list or any other list it is nearly impossible to get off it again, - Some publishers/journals are getting on the list but there is no evidence given about the proof for each publisher/journal... I am myself always looking for new journals/options and found one in Taiwan. - Elite Hall Publishing House (the name appals me - I clearly do not like it) - When checking the predatory journal/publishers lists - they are on it... - On the other hand they cherage a APC of 29 US$ and create DOI and immediate online versions of your paper (e.g. business, law, tax law)... - I cannot see that this is a highly predatory approach. - The most imporatant point is often quality and peer-review. - In my field there is nearly no peer-review (law, tax law) - so I might be tempteted to use such a publisher/journal... - Still I have other means to publish my papers in OA for free (but then again - mostly in newly emerging journals that are based in the Ukraine or Indonesia)... - These newly emerging online journals are so small and unimportant, that they are not even listed on predatory journal lists (and since they do not charge APCs it is unlikley that they will be listed) - the last point brings us to a new angle: is the predatory journals list about high APCs or low quality? Or both? - Some of us (even if respected) value the publication as such as higher than thougths about IF or tough peer-review. - Some of us are self employed or have founded own institutes... - If you are old enough (mature career stage) or do not have the insitutional money in your back to pay the APC or come from non-wealthy backgrounds you may choose/be forced to seek cheaper ways to get your paper out...

There must be a principle that you cite what is the most well validated, peer reviewed and trusted source of anything you use to support your own research research. Where there is an option, for example, a PhD thesis or a peer reviewed Journal article in an ABS 3* listed journal, I would generally opt to go with the journal granted both support the work being referenced, especially if the work is by the same author. Furthermore, in as much as that referenced article supports the application of any methods or theories, you have a judgement to make in selecting what source to use, again I support the journal article where one exists. This is similar to a recent case I have encountered in which a third party seeks to compele the referencing of a particular document (his Thesis), despite the work being referenced via a Journal article, clearly recognizing his contribution and his work. Just as a side note, I do believe that in such cases, individuals should go through the processes which exist for arbitrating over such issues, rather than go through various forms of social media such as researchgate, in an attempt to tarnish reputation. In this regard, much of that individuals own intentions are shown.

On the direct issue of pre-print. Pre-prints are exactly that, a pre printing of the article, and therefore subject to changes in the review of the manuscript and accepting of final proof. Much can be done between a manuscript being accepted and going to print - if you reference a pre-print, you should be aware of this, in particular if there are inaccuracies later found in the pre-print (hopefully not, but its a chance you take).

In the end the spirit has to be using reputable sources that can be validated, and on which your contribution can rest, while recognizing the contributions of all.

Once again thank you so much Dr. Quan Hoang Nguyen, Aneeba Rashid

Thank you Dr. Andrey Davydenko, Ehab M. Zayed, Carsten Weerth, Ahmed Ismail Ebada, and Devon K. Barrow for sharing your opinions.

Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha, thank you for asking this interesting question! 👍

Dear Devon K. Barrow , Thank you for finding the time to comment here (you are also welcome to leave your reply in the comments section for your pre-print). Please let me reply:

> There must be a principle that you cite what is the most well validated, peer reviewed and trusted source of anything you use to support your own research research.

I totally agree.

> Where there is an option, for example, a PhD thesis or a peer reviewed Journal article in an ABS 3* listed journal, I would generally opt to go with the journal granted both support the work being referenced, especially if the work is by the same author.

I'm afraid in the above case you do not have this option available. In your paper you used a method proposed in my thesis, but this method was not published in the journal article. Therefore your readers may mistakenly assume that the method was derived by the authors of your paper. I previously presented facts showing how you and some of your co-authors are getting an unfair acquisition of scientific credit by publishing methods from my thesis without making appropriate references and then publishing subsequent papers referring to your papers instead of the original source. For the facts see the comments section to this paper:

Article Optimising forecasting models for inventory planning

> This is similar to a recent case I have encountered in which a third party seeks to compele the referencing of a particular document (his Thesis), despite the work being referenced via a Journal article, clearly recognizing his contribution and his work.

Thank you very much for recognizing my contribution and my work. After all, I derived and explained the whole framework of the error metrics that you and your co-authors are very successfully using nowadays in all your recent publications and study courses. Also, your co-authors are using these metrics in many presentations (but, sadly, without any references to the original work, however..). Invested a lot of time and worked hard on it, so, naturally I would expect that the contribution I made deserves to be recognized.

Sadly, there are many examples when you and your co-authors use methods from my works without making any references at all (see the above comments section for the above paper). I can also provide you with many links to your co-authors' presentations where my methods were used and no references to the original work were given. For example:

https://github.com/lancastercmaf/ISF2019/blob/master/slides/Barak_Sasan_ISF2019.pdf

On slide 10 the formula for AvgRelAME was proposed in my Ph.D. thesis on page 64, but you do not give any indication of that. There are many similar presentations when a method proposed my thesis is shown in slides, but references are never given. Now you claim you are not obliged to do that because a Ph.D. thesis is not a serious enough source to be cited. Well, if you do not want to cite the source then do not use the method at all. But you want to use the method but not cite the source. Sorry, it does not work this way.

Returning to your pre-print: the journal article you cited does not include the method you used in the pre-print. But the thesis does include the method you used. Now for some reasons you do not want to explain why you do not want to cite the thesis itself. The text is always available to your from the library, and you only need one page to confirm that the method is there.

>Just as a side note, I do believe that in such cases, individuals should go through the processes which exist for arbitrating over such issues, rather than go through various forms of social media such as researchgate, in an attempt to tarnish reputation. In this regard, much of that individuals own intentions are shown.

I never had any intent to tarnish anyone's reputation, but the facts I described obviously require attention. Discussing the facts in the RG helps understand different perspectives and to collect independent opinions on the issue. All my comments are supported by the facts I described. You are welcome to express your point of view, so that's why I was very interested in reading your comment.

Unfortunately, I still could not understand the reason why you refuse to cite the thesis:

1) The IJF ("peer-reviewed Journal") allows citing a Ph.D. thesis

2) Your co-authors referenced my thesis previously (here's the reference: Trapero at. al, 2013, p. 242, see below).

So if a "peer-reviewed Journal article in an ABS*3 listed journal" article cited my thesis, why cannot you do the same?

> In this regard, much of that individuals own intentions are shown.

Regarding my intentions, they are very simple and very clear: you and some of your your colleagues should stop presenting the results from my Ph.D. thesis, articles, and chapters without making proper references.

Sincerely,

Andrey Davydenko

References:

Trapero Arenas, J., Pedregal, D. J., Fildes, R., & Kourentzes, N. (2013). Analysis of judgmental adjustments in the presence of promotions. International Journal of Forecasting, 29(2), 234-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2012.10.002

Andrey, my point is simple. We obviously disagree and it is okay to do so. You have your opinion and we have ours - I think this is not unheard of in research or practice. You keep writing these long winded responses, and using researchgate at a forum for this venting. Guess what - I have as solution. Why not use the proper channels to err your grievances e.g. approach the journals with the matter. I have nothing to hide - we reference your papers and your work - you disagree. So let the issue be settled along the appropriate channels. I didn't realize this was the forum for doing so. In an open and sincere appeal to you, I really encourage you to use appropriate channels. If I am told, I am wrong, I will happily take whatever steps are necessary. What you are doing via this forum is not good and it is not professional. I will no longer respond, and/or discuss anything of this nature via researchgate.

Devon, thanks for your additional comments. When posting your pre-print on RG you expected to collect opinions on it. In my feedback I provided you with the facts showing that your pre-print contains plagiarism: you presented a method that was originally proposed in my Ph.D. thesis, but you did not cite the thesis. Now you are unhappy about my comments and are asking me to use other channels. Please let me decide it myself as to which channels to use, how, and when.

Apart from the pre-print, I also showed you the examples when you and your co-authors present methods from my thesis and articles and make no references to the original work at all.

If you disagree with the facts I provided, please be specific.

Thank you for letting me know here about your judgment of my actions.

Let me also tell you that in my view it is not professional and not ethical to prepare papers and presentations that do not cite the original work properly.

Andrey Davydenko I think it's absolutely appropriate for your posts in RG. It's an interesting and important subject that most researchers should care about (some may not, as they have a few reasons, blah blah blah).

Perhaps, you can make a new thread / shared project so more people can join the discussions.

partially agree with the answer of my professor Frank T. Edelmann . According to my opinion, I do not recommend the utilization of the preprint option and the avoid of this is better than the use of it.

Regards

Preprints may be helpful for many scholars. If I would require help I would seek it in closed circles. To publish early may lead to thefts (as I is discussed above).

The practice to give out DOIs on preprint papers is an attempt to secure the authorship...

But we all must be aware that even the normal and formal way of handing in papers to journals has repeatedly lead to manuskript thefts (it is done this way: a referee/reviewer rejects a paper and then unlawful and unethically uses it or parts of it for his/her research publication)...

Dear Carsten Weerth, Agree about DOI. Preprints in my definition should have DOI, a timestamp.

Frank T. Edelmann , Waleed Thanoon Not sure about the definitions of pre-prints in the mindset of some professors. May you share your opinions as you tend to against preprints?

Dear Carsten Weerth ,

Totally agree with you about this. That's why ethics and morals should play an important role in academic assessment.

Paper reviews nowadays are subjective, and there are bad reviewers around. I know a case that they can steal your idea or do some follow ups even your paper is still under review. But then that's how they can claim themselves as experts.

You wrote:

"But we all must be aware that even the normal and formal way of handing in papers to journals has repeatedly lead to manuskript thefts (it is done this way: a referee/reviewer rejects a paper and then unlawful and unethically uses it or parts of it for his/her research publication)..."

Dear Quan Hoang Nguyen, I may be old-fashioned, but I'm still tending against preprints. In my personal opinion, a manuscript that has been deposited in a preprint repository, is not a "New Submission" when you submit it to a journal. Times are changing, however, and various journals now accept preprints. However, just taking ACS (American Chemical Society) alone, every journal has a different preprint policy (see attached example). Thus, after all, I prefer the classical submission process, and I'm not (yet) convinced about the utility of preprints.

Dear Frank T. Edelmann ,

Thanks for sharing your opinions. After all, such policy in the attachment is decided by whom, if you professors don't support it. Whether the policy poses some disadvantages in publishing in those journals, but an answer to the main question in this thread is not well explained.

Dear Nand Lal Kushwaha and Quan Hoang Nguyen, personally I never cited any preprint in our publications, and I doubt if I ever will. There are open questions about preprints that remain. One of them is: What happens if a manuscript is rejected after the preprint has been posted?

Dear Frank T. Edelmann ,

Perhaps that is the common practice in that field. Your question weights the status of a preprint more than the ideas inside it.

FYI, here is a link about preprints:

https://plos.org/open-science/preprints/preprint-faqs/

Thank you Dr. Frank T. Edelmann, Quan Hoang Nguyen, Carsten Weerth, Andrey Davydenko and Waleed Thanoon for the contribution.

Dear Quan Hoang Nguyen, as I mentioned earlier, the importance of preprints depends very much on the traditions in different areas of research. Especially in mathematics, preprints are very popular and important.

I think it would be totally inappropriate to cite a pre-print article. It may have some technical as well as ethical consequences. Inappropriate use of preprints should be avoided especially in a research that addresses sensitive issues. Pre-prints should not serve more than informing our peers that an article is on its way for publication. From scientific excellence perspective, only peer-reviewed and published articles should be cited.

I fully agree with Mohammed A. Mohammed in that preprints should not be cited. In my personal opinion they are overrated and more or less useless, at least in our area of research (chemistry). Why not just submitting your manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals right away?

For social sciences, it is not advisable to add a pre-print since it is not peer-reviewed.

Thank you Dr. Frank T. Edelmann, Mohammed A. Mohammed and Apurba Kumar Chattopadhyay for sharing your valuable contribution.

An article or other scientific text that is in the editorial preparation process for publication, is under review, during the editorial composition, etc. if it is listed as preprint in online databases of indexation of scientific texts is an informative one. In this way, other researchers and scientists can find out what are the new trends and research conducted in a particular field of science, what new theses have been put forward and how they are argued, what research results are obtained etc. But because it is usually not known what will be the result of the review, what the rating of reviewers for a specific text that is being reviewed and / or is in an editorial revision, so it is uncertain whether it will be published in a specific scientific journal or a specific monograph, etc. It is unknown whether the reviews will contain serious comments suggesting that the author of the text should apply certain amendments, proofreading, modification of the concept of the written text, etc. Therefore, until the preprint is published it should not be cited.

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Thank you Dr. Dariusz Prokopowicz for sharing your opinion.

People generally cite print version.

As for our field of research, I fully agree with Dariusz Prokopowicz in that preprints should not be cited until they are at least published online in the final, revised version.

I have never cited a pre-print and personally, I would not upload a pre-print anywhere prior to publication

Dear, Bodh R Sharma and Frank T. Edelmann, Joan Nyika, Dariusz Prokopowicz, Yes as discussed by most of the members that the pre-print should not be cited because during the peer-review process major changes may be done. Thank you all for the valuable contributions.

I have never cited a pre-print and i favor to upload after published.

I agree with Abdul Kuddus 100 %

good to know

Joan Nyika and Tahseen Ahmed Bhutto, Thank you for sharing your opinion and recommended the question.

It is OK, if it is a discussion or working paper of a reputable institution.

Thank you Dr. Sule Akkoyunlu for sharing your opinion.

Recently agreed to post our publication to the pre-print service because we are confident in our work and we were interested in trying it out. However, I am a little disappointed, because the format of the publication does not correspond to the original, as well as there are even typographical errors, the tables cannot be read, the section titles are dull blue and do not stand out, the images are of lower quality. I understand that this is due to the automatic insertion of a pdf from editorial, but I don't like it because other scientists read it and think we've formatted it messily. I contacted the pre-print service staff, sent them the original file&figures, they promised to fix it, but... nothing has changed in a week. It seems like a bad advertisement... I hope matter that viewers will read the text & will not pay attention to the details, but we all know that details matter.

You have rightly articulated the problem attached with pre- print service. I am not a great supporter of uploading ore- prints. @Angelika Voronova

Nand, preprints are what they are (i.e. they have not been through the generally acceptable journal peer review process) and, as such, many scholars would tend to hesitate to cite them. However, some of them do provide good reading materials which could be developed into full, peer-reviewed articles. Interesting question here.

I appreciate your contribution Angelika Voronova, Apurba Kumar Chattopadhyay, and John Mendy. Thank you all for sharing your valuable opinions.

In my view, it is preferable to upload the manuscript once it receives the DOI and before publishing (has number and volume) to obtain the largest number of citations before publication

Quotes are never cited except from printed articles only, because what will you put the source from which you are quoted?

Most journals allow citation of preprints in the reference list of the article in question, similar to journal articles. The NIH has recommended a preprint citation format that makes clear the status of the work as a preprint and includes its DOI.