ResearchGate suggests us to add 'unpublished work' to our publications.
Is it safe to share unpublished work to others? I know of some Professors (like my Research Guide), who share preprints of their upcoming papers to selected and trustworthy friends and improve papers up on getting their feedback. While this may be done in a closed circle, is it safe to share unpublished work in a public forum?
Your views are welcome! Muchas Gracias! - Sundar
Safe if there is DOI - Digital Object Identifier for the published material in RG
- Make your research citable. DOIs provide information on where your work can be found online. They are guaranteed to never change, making them a great way to provide a reliable link to any of your research.
- Showcase all of your research. DOIs provide the ability to find all publications associated with a single author, including research that hasn’t been published.
- Put a date on your discovery. DOIs include the publishing date of your research, to make sure you get the credit you deserve.
https://explore.researchgate.net/display/support/Generating+a+DOI
Safe if there is DOI - Digital Object Identifier for the published material in RG
- Make your research citable. DOIs provide information on where your work can be found online. They are guaranteed to never change, making them a great way to provide a reliable link to any of your research.
- Showcase all of your research. DOIs provide the ability to find all publications associated with a single author, including research that hasn’t been published.
- Put a date on your discovery. DOIs include the publishing date of your research, to make sure you get the credit you deserve.
https://explore.researchgate.net/display/support/Generating+a+DOI
Friends - thank you for kind replies..
Still I prefer not to share unpublished work in public.. Better to present them in Conferences or publish in journals..
Yes, it is got to share unpublished works as suggested by Prof.Krishnan Umachandran.
I love share my works to maximum possible researchers. Recently, I have uploaded a paper which provides particle swarm optimization (PSO) codes. For new comers it will be very helpful to them.
Regards,
M.N.Alam
Dear @Sundarapandian, sharing the scientific articles, whether published or non-published at different academic networks have the same issues. IP assets may be protected easily.
New Elsevier services and collaborations are making it easier for researchers to share scholarly content.
Still unleashing the power of sharing!
Over a year has passed since Elsevier announced new policies, perspectives and services for article sharing and invited researchers and hosting platforms to work with us to develop and innovate. What’s happened since?...
For authors, impact metrics are growing in number and becoming more useful (for example, metrics about usage, media mentions, sharing and citations), and usage data are available faster and more regularly. For example, Mendeley Stats helps authors understand the impact of their work, where they are being talked about, and how other researchers are finding their work....
It’s not always clear to researchers how they can share manuscripts and final published journal articles. Different platforms have different approaches, and so do different publishers. As a result, researchers may inadvertently share a version they shouldn’t because they don’t have the information at hand to understand what the reuse rights are for different articles.
To help address this problem, a new website provides information on the evolution of article sharing – including simplified publisher sharing policies, progress reports on a technical pilot that will enable authors to post articles more easily, and a proposed extension of COUNTER to monitor article use across platforms. The site – called How Can I Share It? – will be a home for commentary and discussion about article sharing...
The attached infographics about downloads bring many fine facts.
https://www.elsevier.com/connect/still-unleashing-the-power-of-sharing
It is NOT a good idea to share an unpublished work with other peers in RG or for that matter to others. It is better to wait until you publish your work. That said, of course, I am not against if you're sharing with your trusted colleagues for critiques and feedback so that the paper can be improved and polished and submitted to a high impact journal. Even I would go ahead and suggest that if you're submitting a conference abstract, you better make sure that a rough draft of the paper is almost ready for submission as soon as you return from the conference. This is a general recommendation to everyone! The fact that you have to generate a 'DOI' for your 'unpublished work' warrants that you have to necessarily publish the paper. What if you get a DOI for your unpublished work, and later on you change your mind and publish it officially in a journal. Would you have two DOI for the same paper or would you tweak your title to make it look different piece of work?
I had two prior incidences which I could brief. On one occasion, I discussed with a specialty group that I have this 'novel idea' that no one in the group has thought about. Every one in the international community was happily brainstorm with me and congratulated me for coming up with such a wonderful thinking. Alas, what happened, people who had means and resources (students/funding), immediately charged with funding applications and rush to take the leadership position in that domain. I was never even invited to co-author or acknowledge for triggering such idea in their mind.
In another incidence, in a similar vain, I wrote a 'theoretical paper' on a novel concept, which would revolutionize the scientific thinking within my field. I was applying for a position with a leading faculty, and eventually I joined with that group. What happened later was unbelievable. Apparently this faculty shared my theoretical construct with his post-doc, who was looking for an idea to get funding. He used my paper as a base, did some pilot experiment, and got funded to establish himself. Although I worked with that professor and the other person, I finally learnt what happened. The person made sure that I was not on any of his publication as he wanted to take the leadership position.
Now you tell me, is it safe to share your unpublished work with others? I guess not!
Sharing of any unpublished research work or worth ideas without some sort of protection is a complete disaster. Sharing things online, one runs the risk of one's idea getting wrongly appropriated, either consciously or unconsciously by other researchers. The entire system of credit in science is based on being the first to publish a finding in a journal of field concerned. There is no incentive to post on blogs or community Web sites.
http://philosopherscocoon.typepad.com/blog/2014/05/should-you-post-unpublished-work-online-and-what-should-our-discipline-do-collectively.html
I agree with the view that it is not safe to share unpublished works with others, too.
The competitive character of science-- that made secrecy of raw data an issue-- was always an ego problem. Now it is life or death!
I read that 2/3 of US university research is funded from corporate for-profits. I also read that 1/3 has to be withdrawn POST publication for irregularities. If correct, these two figures follow. Given the nanobasis on which most researchers work today, setting up a lab is astronomically costly. Once set up, upkeep and technical personnel are also costly. This causes many labs to struggle for too little money. Worst still, unlike MDs, PhDs-- once out of funds and their projects terminated-- are so specialized that their future may be limited to becoming Uberdrivers!
Such a setting may make far too many into Jesuits for their funders. With that in mind, I think we are far beyond the ego phase of non-sharing. But at least in the past, all Gov funded data was public dominion. Now it seems most is proprietary as that's the basis of funding by corporate cannibals. So, to survive, ya gotta go dark, produce what the funders demand, and keep it to yourself until you've collected full credit and remuneration. But that's not science, that's just jungle business, and that's why so much research is often as reliable as stockmarket or horse race tips. But Australia is still-- at least academically-- on an honor system so I think critical data like yours should be discussed, especially as you are in uncharted waters and may find yourself self-deceiving as so many do. I always believed what my father used to tell his collaborators: "Steal my ideas? Who cares, I'm full of ideas!" But in these days of corporate cannibalism, millionaire profs, and students who quit to become billionaires, every factoid is bait to the entrepreneurs-- a French pejorative term meaning "taker in the middle." But keep in mind that the paying public is seeing science more and more as kids paying with dangerous materials; so unless collaborationist openness becomes the rule, we'll go Medieval and scientists will come to behave like the alchemists of yore.
Frankly, the only time I would share non-published work is if I know I will never have a chance to address the questions I raise and REALLY am curious about the result. In this case, I realize I am probably giving up the chance for authorship - but at least would have the satisfaction of gaining knowledge.
Being a full-prof, however, I recognize I am in a different point in my career. At this point I have far more questions than I will ever be able to answer myself - but am still intensely curious!
ScienceDirect practice.
Articles in Press on ScienceDirect are articles that have been accepted for publication in Elsevier journals but have not yet been assigned to specific issues. They’re a great way to read about the latest developments in your research area before articles are officially published....
https://blog.sciencedirect.com/posts/get-a-jump-on-reading-the-latest-research-with-articles-in-press?utm_campaign=ScienceDirect%20Newsletter%20-%202016&utm_campaignPK=176444479&utm_term=OP20255&utm_content=261023259&utm_source=68&utm_acid=133520532&BID=768124305&utm_medium=email&SIS_ID=0
A researcher has an obligation to publish research results within a reasonable time. It is unethical to share scientific information prior to the publication. However, reasonable access to data and research findings should normally be shared with any member of the research group involved in the project works. Also, data/result related to critical public health issues can be made public with due consent of the owner (individual/organization/ controlling authority) as well as of the journal editor (if submitted for publication).
I agree with the view that it is not safe to share unpublished works with others, especially the ones which we do not know get well. I only share unpublished work with trusted colleagues and peers.
In my opinion also it is not safe to share unpublished research work with other researchers. Many a times people may not follow ethics. Thanks
Is it safe to share unpublished work to others?
Think it depends on the author's intention. If the unpublished work is being planned or in the midst of submission to conference / journal for review or publication, then it is not appropriate to share the unpublished work to others in RG. This is to avoid necessary issues like other researchers copying the research ideas, duplication of similar articles in RG & journal(s) etc. If the author's intention is not to submit the unpublished work to any journal and it is in its final version to share with RG members then it is OK to share it in RG.
It all depend on the author(s). If the work will be published soon, I believe it is better not to display it to the public.
Unpublsihed work are supposedly a work that has not been reviewed or cited by other researchers. tTey are in normally formof new ideas or new approaches, which may be correct or in-correct. The danger will be that these "potential" ideas (if good) will be used by other researchers either knowingly or otherwise. But there is a saying that "sharing is caring".
Dear Dr. Vaidyanathan and my RG friends,
(1). Sharing of unpublished data or work is often done by the researchers in their own interest. They often share their research data/information with other experts of the field for improvement of their own work and/or interpretation of their findings. When data are submitted for consideration of publication, they go through the anonymous reviewers, may not be recommended for publication and returned to the researchers. Are these not sharing of unpublished data/works by compulsion?
(2). Old and incomplete data/information which could not be published by a researcher on time and the researcher subsequently switched to some other new and unrelated research project/ programme, many times remain unused.
(3). Sharing of such unpublished data with DOI (Digital Object Identifier) not only brings credit to the researcher but also benefit the scientific community as they form bases of further research in that direction. Huge public or private funds invested in research may go waste if research findings are not utilised.
As I have stated in my previous post, intellectual property assets may be protected easily as they are protected for published works.
Maybe we should ask ourselves about purpose of sharing the unpublished papers.
I agree that there are different points of view, as there are advantages and disadvantages of sharing the unpublished work. Someone may obtain good feedback which will improve the quality of the paper. On the other hand side, one can complain that paper is illegitimate or unqualified for submission to publishing.
I don't think it is safe. Actually when we try to do a work we try very hard to get it done and we want to enjoy the fruit of that work. I'm not saying like if we share our work with others, then they will publish it but we have a fear that if somebody publishes that then our hard work will be in vain. So, it is good to trust people and share your thoughts rather than sharing your work ideas and the progress that we have done.
It is not safe to share unpublished research work with other researchers
Preprints are safe to publish. Such type of share brings more visibility to research.
https://explore.researchgate.net/display/support/Preprints
Yes, preprints with DOI can be shared as mentioned by Prof. Ljubomir.
Make it a preprint and after getting creative licence and DOI you can share .
RG is very helpful for making such preprint .
Preprints, for example, can be divisive. People in some disciplines happily and comfortably embrace preprinting. For others, the risks of preprints are real and outweigh the benefits. Either way, the world still needs guidance on things like preprints from COPE...
https://publicationethics.org/news/letter-cope-co-chairs-april-2019
May be its better to wait untill you get an acceptace from conference or journal , I am not sure about Krishnan Umachandran suggestion but It will be great tool so we can add research figures befor any publicatio
It is not apt for a researcher to share work and related findings/data that has not been published. It would be fine to share once the work is accepted for publication or published.
I do not recommend unless you are sharing it with people whom you trust for peer review and feedback purposes.
Too much risky and unethical. Authorship guidelines forbid sharing the work under publication consideration in any form.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers