Do Preprints Require More Rigorous Screening? | The Scientist Magazine®

peter.suber's bookmarks 2019-05-14


"Two weeks ago, a tweet storm erupted over what scientists normally consider a noble effort: the posting of a preprint to bioRxiv. The article originally went online in March, but in July, a reader noticed something missing in the draft—the methods. “As such it is not possible to critically evaluate the manuscript,” the anonymous commenter Preprint Now noted on bioRxiv.

Shortly after, the tweets arrived. “Preprints without methods are ads not scientific manuscripts and should be treated as such,” Michael Eisen, a biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, tweeted...."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags: oa.preprints oa.quality oa.peer_review oa.biorxiv oa.biology oa.versions

Date tagged:

05/14/2019, 13:06

Date published:

05/14/2019, 09:05