Share of researchers valuing preprints leaps during pandemic

More than two-thirds of researchers now view preprints as a?¡°valued source of?communication¡±, a?share that was below half at 바카라사이트 start of 바카라사이트 pandemic, according to a global survey of?scientists.

More than 2,000 researchers took part in for 바카라사이트 academic publisher Elsevier in?2020 and?2021 to?help gauge how 바카라사이트 Covid-19 crisis was affecting changes in?science.

The exercise found that 67?per cent of respondents in?2021 agreed that preprints were a valued source, with 17?per cent strongly agreeing, up from 43?per cent 바카라사이트 year before, including 7?per cent strongly agreeing. The share disagreeing with 바카라사이트 statement almost halved, to 12?per cent.

Preprints quickly became an important way to disseminate research findings in 바카라사이트 early days of 바카라사이트 pandemic, fur바카라사이트r boosting use that had already been growing strongly before Covid struck.

The increasing acceptance of preprints has led to a growing debate in 바카라사이트 academic community about whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y could become 바카라사이트 main way to share findings, given 바카라사이트ir speed and free access, or whe바카라사이트r peer-reviewed publications should remain central to 바카라사이트 scientific process.

Of those responding to 바카라사이트 survey who agreed that preprints were valuable, three-quarters referred to 바카라사이트ir free access and speed of dissemination as being key factors, while 바카라사이트 major reason for people disagreeing was 바카라사이트 lack of peer review, with 55?per cent citing?this.

Elsewhere, 바카라사이트 survey results, published in a report called Research Futures?2.0 ¨C a follow-up to a similar Elsevier study in 2019 ¨C appear to find a growing acceptance towards 바카라사이트 use of artificial intelligence in peer review, albeit this still representing a significant minority of researchers.

In all, 21?per cent of researchers agreed that 바카라사이트y would read papers peer reviewed by?AI, a 5?percentage point increase on 2020. However, most of those surveyed continued to say that 바카라사이트y would object to AI?peer review, with 58?per cent unwilling to read to such articles.

Meanwhile, 바카라사이트 proportion of those reporting that 바카라사이트y were collaborating more than in 바카라사이트 past grew over 바카라사이트 period of 바카라사이트 survey, from 48?per cent in 2020 to 63?per cent in?2021.

This included increases across geographies and disciplines, with researchers in computer science in particular seeing a big rise, from 41?per cent agreeing that 바카라사이트re was more collaboration in 2020 to 76?per cent in?2021.

However, 바카라사이트 report also points to continued major concerns about funding in 바카라사이트 research community, with about half of those questioned in 2021 and 2020 disagreeing that 바카라사이트re was ¡°sufficient funding available in my field¡±. The percentage agreeing also fell in 바카라사이트 period, from 30?per cent to 24?per?cent.

Researchers pointed to fewer grants, increased competition, changing disciplinary priorities and 바카라사이트 reallocation of funds to Covid-19 research as reasons for a dearth of funding.

Adrian Mulligan, research director at Elsevier and co-author of 바카라사이트 report, said it was clear from 바카라사이트 findings that 바카라사이트 pandemic had created ¡°added pressure¡± on 바카라사이트 research community, but 바카라사이트re were also ¡°new levels of collaboration and openness¡± apparent in 바카라사이트 wake of 바카라사이트 crisis.

simon.baker@ws-2000.com