What is your personal policy with preprints?

  • Context: Other 
  • Thread starter Thread starter andresB
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the personal policies of researchers regarding the publication of preprints in relation to journal submissions. Participants explore the timing of preprint submissions, the impact of preprints on feedback and promotion, and the differences in practices across various fields of physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants typically wait until their manuscript is accepted by a journal before submitting a preprint, while others have chosen to post preprints on arXiv prior to acceptance.
  • One participant questions the rationale behind waiting for acceptance before submitting a preprint, suggesting that it may not be necessary.
  • Another participant mentions the desire for a double-blind peer review process as a reason for waiting to submit a preprint.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of double-blind reviews in physics, with some arguing that it is difficult to maintain anonymity due to the nature of the research and the community.
  • Participants note that practices vary significantly between different subfields of physics, with some fields expecting preprints as a norm, while others do not.
  • One participant reflects on their experience with journals that do not offer double-blind review, suggesting that this may be more common in fields outside of medicine.
  • Another participant shares their approach of waiting for clarity on a journal's preprint policy or the incorporation of referee comments before posting a preprint.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the timing and necessity of preprint submissions, indicating that there is no consensus on the best approach. The discussion highlights a variety of practices and opinions across different fields within physics.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention specific experiences with journal policies and the challenges of maintaining anonymity in peer review, but do not resolve these issues or reach a unified stance on preprint practices.

andresB
Messages
627
Reaction score
374
Assuming you publish preprints at all, then the question is: do you publish you preprints before submitting the paper to a journal? or do you wait to your paper to be accepted before submitting the preprint?

Also, have preprints resulted in more promotion for your work? have you received more feedback?

I usually wait until the manuscript have been accepted for publication in a journal. But for my last work I decided to put it in arxiv first since I have no idea what journal would be suitable for it
 
Physics news on Phys.org
andresB said:
or do you wait to your paper to be accepted before submitting the preprint?
Why would anyone do that?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Why would anyone do that?
If you want a double-blind process for the peer review, for example.
 
Who does double-blind in physics? Experimentally, description of the apparatus gives the secret away (and not just in high energy). Theoretically it's not much better. Heck, it's hard enough to make it single-blind. It's not at all unusual to know who the referees are by what they say and how they say it.
 
I guess that's the huge difference between fields in physics. Working in nano and photonics, I publish in a lot of materials journals as well as physics, so single-blind can be expected. No one can keep track of several thousand researchers all doing related stuff.

No journal I've ever submitted to has been double blind. My name appears at the top. Is that a medicine thing?

But regarding the actual preprint question, it's a case by case basis. I've never felt the need because I've never felt that pressure that my paper needs to be on the record TODAY and not 8 months from now, and we often foot the bill for open access. But I've come to understand that in HEP, preprints are expected for any paper worth anything.
 
crashcat said:
No one can keep track of several thousand researchers all doing related stuff.
You could say that about HEP. But it's often easy to tell.
 
crashcat said:
No journal I've ever submitted to has been double blind. My name appears at the top. Is that a medicine thing?
I just saw the option in IOP for a recent submission in journal of physics A.
 
I think a time or two I waited in cases where a journal's pre-print policy was unclear or when I did not want a version out there that did not incorporate the referee's comments. But if the journal allows posting to arXiv before publication and the co-authors were OK with a version on arXiv without changes based on referee comments, I go ahead and post it.
 

Similar threads

Other Should we reach out to fellow researchers, or patiently wait for them?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
703
Other Anyone have any experience with preprints? (Format question)
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
What should I do if I found a paper with same result as mine?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
923
Journal selection advice for publishing my papers
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Other Your thoughts about "International Journal of Theoretical Physics"
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Other Becoming anxious since my paper was submitted to journals
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Can i cite a preprint in a neuroscience paper ?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Open Access Publishing in Physics: Benefits & Platforms
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Other How can scientists effectively review papers outside of their expertise?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Other Questions on quality of research
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K