In our recent lab meeting we revisited the topic of pre-prints and pre-print servers to answer the question - should I post a pre-print of my manuscript?
Thanks to Jordan Holdorf for helping me write this post.
In a recent lab meeting, we revisited the question: Should I post a preprint of my manuscript? A few years ago, I wrote about this topic after posting my fourth preprint to bioRxiv. Since then, the landscape has shifted, and our discussion—thanks to Jordan Holdorf for the notes—highlighted new considerations worth sharing.
*Generated by Google Gemini.
What Are Preprints?
Preprints are manuscripts shared publicly before formal peer review. They’re free to post, free to read, and usually come with a DOI, making them citable. Popular servers include arXiv, bioRxiv, EcoEvoRxiv, medRxiv, and SSRN.
The concept isn’t new, arXiv launched in physics back in 1991, but preprints surged during COVID-19 as scientists raced to share findings quickly. Conservation science and ecology have increasingly embraced preprints as well.
Why Bother? Pros and Cons
Pros
- Visibility and speed: Your work is accessible immediately, not months later.
- Feedback: Pre-review comments can strengthen your paper.
- Citations: Preprints can be cited, even if the journal version is paywalled.
- Priority: Posting establishes your claim to an idea.
- Flexibility: You can build on work that’s still under review.
Cons
- Quality concerns: Preprints aren’t peer-reviewed, so errors can spread.
- Misinformation risk: Especially if high-profile topics get picked up by the press.
- Version confusion: If titles change, citations may split across versions.
- Journal policies: Most journals now allow preprints, but check first.
- Double-blind issues: Reviewers can find your preprint and identify authors.
- Time cost: Uploading and revising adds extra steps.
Overall, the benefits usually outweigh the drawbacks—if you manage the process carefully.
Key considerations
Some lab members expressed concern that their work could get stolen from a pre-print and published by an other author. I would think this is rare, however, with AI making it increasingly easy to paraphrase other people’s work, the risk is probably higher than it used to be.
We decided that if you are concerned about plagiarism, it is best not to link your open code repository in the preprint. That could make it too easy for a bad actor to create a new version of your work.
Media is another factor. Journalists generally prefer to cover peer-reviewed work, though during COVID, preprints made headlines. For most fields, you can expect little media attention until formal publication. This is good, as peer review is crucial for credibility.
Finally, think strategically. Preprints make sense for urgent topics, methods papers, or when you want community feedback. They’re less practical if you’re under time pressure or working on a niche topic.
How to Post a Preprint
Here’s a streamlined guide based on experience and Jordan’s notes:
- Finish the manuscript and get coauthor approval. Check your target journal’s preprint policy.
- Format carefully. Upload a polished PDF with clear figures, tables, and your contact info.
- Sign up for a server and ORCID. ORCID helps link your work across platforms.
- Choose a license. Think about reuse—Creative Commons options vary.
- Upload and wait. Most servers take ~24 hours to post.
- Share strategically. Share on social media (to other scientists, not for general public), email colleagues, or post on Google Scholar if you want feedback.
- Revise before acceptance. Once your paper is accepted, most servers block updates. Link the final version. Matching titles help merge citations; otherwise, see the server’s instructions for how to fix the connection.
My Experience
I’ve had mixed results. One preprint was redundant because the journal review was lightning-fast. Another has been cited multiple times while stuck in review purgatory—proof that preprints can keep your work alive. The biggest headache? Title changes. If your published title differs, make sure the preprint links correctly.
Final Thoughts
Preprints aren’t a magic bullet, but they’re a powerful tool when used thoughtfully. They accelerate science, increase visibility, and invite collaboration—but they also demand care around version control, anonymity, and journal policies.
On the balance of it I use them selectively. For work that is time-sensitive, methodologically important, or where I want feedback, then I do a pre-print. If I’m busy or there is little to gain, then I skip it.