4 ms·

For example, you can't have a repo that does both astronomy and psychology. It's a restriction with many publishers, but note that their policies are usually ve

For example, you can't have a repo that does both astronomy and psychology. It's a restriction with many publishers, but note that their policies are usually very gray.

tofof 8y ago
Still unclear, to the point of being simply wrong. One feature of preprint repositories is to decouple the science from the control of publishers. How do publishers have a say over what can and cannot be posted to these repositories? Particularly when, as the article notes, many preprint articles will never even be published. Please provide a citation if possible, even a single example. "a single repo can't accept work from disparate fields" ArXiv is a single repository that itself hosts papers in mathematics, physics, astronomy, electrical engineering, computer science, quantitative biology, statistics, quantitative finance, and economics. [1] All are named repeatedly and featured with their own sections on the landing page. Are economics & astronomy considered the same field? How do aggregators (like BASE and CORE) factor in? Why are they not somehow publisher-forbidden? Note also that the arXiv.org FAQ on how they expanded to cover new fields makes no mention whatsoever of publisher restrictions. [2] Instead, it names difficulties like finding qualified moderators for the topics as a barrier, and mentions feasability/desirability as reasons they don't attempt to cover all disciplines. [1]: https://arxiv.org/ https://arxiv.org/ [2]: https://arxiv.org/help/support/faq#1E https://arxiv.org/help/support/faq#1E
- Vinnl 8y ago
  > How do publishers have a say over what can and cannot be posted to these repositories? Publishers can and do add restrictions on submitted papers, such as "can not have been made public before". Indeed, this does not applies to papers that would never have been published, but it does apply to papers that will later be submitted to a journal. ArXiv never had this problem, because it became widespread before the publishers gained much of their influence. It's been a major hurdle for preprint servers in other disciplines, however. It is a lot better nowadays, where many publishers explicitly allow posting preprints. That said, they do still impose some restrictions, and I can imagine having to post works to preprint servers specific to that discipline being one of them. A server like biorXiv wouldn't want to miss out on those preprints, so they'd have to accommodate that - and biorXiv in particular is very apprehensive about not ruffling any publisher feathers. (Likely a factor in its success.)
- lenticular 8y ago
  These are restrictions on authors submitting to journals, not restrictions on repos themselves. You can have a preprint repo hosting whatever you want. It doesn't mean that a researcher with a paper published in a given journal can upload it. If people can't upload their papers while still abiding by the policies of the journal, then your repo is kind of useless. Both publishers and individual journals often have restrictions on preprints. This is a very common one with major publishers. Just because you aren't aware of these restrictions doesn't mean that they don't exist. I have worked with preprint repos in the past, and this is very common.
jessriedel 8y ago
I've never heard of a publisher imposing a restriction that certain repositories only host papers from a certain field. (Presumably by refusing to publish papers posted to such a repository?) Can you please link to an example?
- jobigoud 8y ago
  But are there any other muti disciplinary repos apart from arXiv anyway?
- lenticular 8y ago
  I don't have any policy examples offhand, but it will be outlined in the journals copyright transfer agreement (CTA). This is a very common publisher restriction, as I said. I've done work with preprint repos in the past, and this is the raison d'etre behind many of the smaller ones. This is a restriction on authors uploading their papers, not on the repos themselves. Publishers and individual journals can and do put various restrictions on sharing, since they own the copyright after the CTA, not the author. Incidentally, a large proportion of authors seem to be totally unaware they do not own the copyright to their work after signing the CTA.
  - jessriedel 8y ago
    > since they own the copyright after the CTA, not the author. I think you're talking about an old system that effectively no longer operates, at least in the fields where arXiv and arXiv clones have taken off (physics, math, comp sci, chemistry, biology, engineering, many social sciences, and probably more). When you upload to the arXiv, this is typically done before you publish, and you are required to give the arXiv a license to distribute the work in perpetuity. This cannot be revoked by the author when they then go and publish the paper in the journal. The journal can decline to publish a paper that has already been put on the arXiv, and Nature and Science originally tried to do this, but most journals eventually caved and dropped these policies as arXiv usage had become standard. However, in all those restrictions that have been tried to be enforced by journals, I've never heard of any that allow for upload to a pre-print server as long as the server only served a particular field. This is the part of your original comment I found very confusing, and you have certainly not answered me by simply pointing out the existence of CTAs. I've read CTAs, and I've never seen such a clause. And if I scan the (dwindling) number of journals that still reject papers that have been posted on pre-print servers, I can't find any that make the scope of the server a factor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals_by_preprint_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals_by_p... If you can't point to a particular CTA that has this feature, can you name a journal that you think does, or did in the past?

For example, you can't have a repo that does both astronomy and psychology. It's a restriction with many publishers, but note that their policies are usually very gray.

tofof 8y ago

Still unclear, to the point of being simply wrong. One feature of preprint repositories is to decouple the science from the control of publishers. How do publishers have a say over what can and cannot be posted to these repositories? Particularly when, as the article notes, many preprint articles will never even be published. Please provide a citation if possible, even a single example. "a single repo can't accept work from disparate fields" ArXiv is a single repository that itself hosts papers in mathematics, physics, astronomy, electrical engineering, computer science, quantitative biology, statistics, quantitative finance, and economics. [1] All are named repeatedly and featured with their own sections on the landing page. Are economics & astronomy considered the same field? How do aggregators (like BASE and CORE) factor in? Why are they not somehow publisher-forbidden? Note also that the arXiv.org FAQ on how they expanded to cover new fields makes no mention whatsoever of publisher restrictions. [2] Instead, it names difficulties like finding qualified moderators for the topics as a barrier, and mentions feasability/desirability as reasons they don't attempt to cover all disciplines. [1]: https://arxiv.org/ https://arxiv.org/ [2]: https://arxiv.org/help/support/faq#1E https://arxiv.org/help/support/faq#1E

Vinnl 8y ago
> How do publishers have a say over what can and cannot be posted to these repositories? Publishers can and do add restrictions on submitted papers, such as "can not have been made public before". Indeed, this does not applies to papers that would never have been published, but it does apply to papers that will later be submitted to a journal. ArXiv never had this problem, because it became widespread before the publishers gained much of their influence. It's been a major hurdle for preprint servers in other disciplines, however. It is a lot better nowadays, where many publishers explicitly allow posting preprints. That said, they do still impose some restrictions, and I can imagine having to post works to preprint servers specific to that discipline being one of them. A server like biorXiv wouldn't want to miss out on those preprints, so they'd have to accommodate that - and biorXiv in particular is very apprehensive about not ruffling any publisher feathers. (Likely a factor in its success.)
lenticular 8y ago
These are restrictions on authors submitting to journals, not restrictions on repos themselves. You can have a preprint repo hosting whatever you want. It doesn't mean that a researcher with a paper published in a given journal can upload it. If people can't upload their papers while still abiding by the policies of the journal, then your repo is kind of useless. Both publishers and individual journals often have restrictions on preprints. This is a very common one with major publishers. Just because you aren't aware of these restrictions doesn't mean that they don't exist. I have worked with preprint repos in the past, and this is very common.

jessriedel 8y ago

I've never heard of a publisher imposing a restriction that certain repositories only host papers from a certain field. (Presumably by refusing to publish papers posted to such a repository?) Can you please link to an example?

jobigoud 8y ago
But are there any other muti disciplinary repos apart from arXiv anyway?
lenticular 8y ago
I don't have any policy examples offhand, but it will be outlined in the journals copyright transfer agreement (CTA). This is a very common publisher restriction, as I said. I've done work with preprint repos in the past, and this is the raison d'etre behind many of the smaller ones. This is a restriction on authors uploading their papers, not on the repos themselves. Publishers and individual journals can and do put various restrictions on sharing, since they own the copyright after the CTA, not the author. Incidentally, a large proportion of authors seem to be totally unaware they do not own the copyright to their work after signing the CTA.
- jessriedel 8y ago
  > since they own the copyright after the CTA, not the author. I think you're talking about an old system that effectively no longer operates, at least in the fields where arXiv and arXiv clones have taken off (physics, math, comp sci, chemistry, biology, engineering, many social sciences, and probably more). When you upload to the arXiv, this is typically done before you publish, and you are required to give the arXiv a license to distribute the work in perpetuity. This cannot be revoked by the author when they then go and publish the paper in the journal. The journal can decline to publish a paper that has already been put on the arXiv, and Nature and Science originally tried to do this, but most journals eventually caved and dropped these policies as arXiv usage had become standard. However, in all those restrictions that have been tried to be enforced by journals, I've never heard of any that allow for upload to a pre-print server as long as the server only served a particular field. This is the part of your original comment I found very confusing, and you have certainly not answered me by simply pointing out the existence of CTAs. I've read CTAs, and I've never seen such a clause. And if I scan the (dwindling) number of journals that still reject papers that have been posted on pre-print servers, I can't find any that make the scope of the server a factor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals_by_preprint_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals_by_p... If you can't point to a particular CTA that has this feature, can you name a journal that you think does, or did in the past?