Hello, Great Researchers,
There is a high growing interest among scientists especially the highly experienced ones (NOBEL PRICE WINNERS) nowadays for publishing their research output as pre-print or e-prints without bothering about the peer-reviewers views of any journal especially the high impact factor journals. They believe that any body is free to give his/her opinion on their research and that is their opinion.
Please, could you drop your opinion about this issue? I will appreciate!
Thanks
Regards
Very interesting discussion topic you dropped there.
Pre prints are indeed trending.
Not much to say but I think there is more advantages with preprint than fully peer reviewed manuscript as they can be published immediately with DOI, cited etc...
It is for me a good way of sharing your results raw before a peer reviewer triggers modifications. The chances to receive thousands of feedbacks from more Than 2 reviewers is also an important advantage.
Dear Alain Mwamba Mukendi Thank you very much for your important view point.
Indeed preprints are becoming more and more accepted by scientists, some even think that there is no need to send paper for journal publication...
I'm a 'fence-sitter' on this debate. I agree that pre-prints are useful - but I don't use them myself. To me, findings can only be published when they have been collected. I appreciate the need to pre-publish 'early' findings - but they are best reserved for conference proceedings. I notice the 'new trend' of research protocols i.e. reporting research before it has been undertaken. I have to question where this is 'research that is intended - but may not materialise?' I am not a fan.
I think that preprint is interesting but only if you're sure that your research is strong and think that it would be accepted in a peer reviewed journal. I have seen a lot of low quality preprints recently.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Composition Studies
- Articles