IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v128y2023i3d10.1007_s11192-023-04646-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

(How) should researchers publicize their research papers before peer review?

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Kardos

    (Bloomfield College)

  • Ádám Kun

    (Eötvös University
    Institute of Evolution)

  • Csaba Pléh

    (Central European University)

  • Ferenc Jordán

    (University of Parma)

Abstract

News outlets publicize scientific research findings that have not been peer reviewed yet, and they often do it with active contribution by the authors of the unpublished manuscripts. While researchers are aware of the importance of the peer review process and what it means to discuss findings before manuscripts are accepted for publication, the general public is not. It is imperative to ensure that researchers provide reliable scientific knowledge to each other and to the public, as well as to preserve reliance on the scientific process and peer review. For these reasons, researchers should be more cautious in communicating unpublished work to the public and more accurate about the status of the presented scientific information.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Kardos & Ádám Kun & Csaba Pléh & Ferenc Jordán, 2023. "(How) should researchers publicize their research papers before peer review?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 2019-2023, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04646-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04646-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04646-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-023-04646-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & Andy Smith & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2017. "Poor replication validity of biomedical association studies reported by newspapers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Julie M. Hurd, 2000. "The transformation of scientific communication: A model for 2020," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 51(14), pages 1279-1283.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sesé Albert, 2018. "Discussing the Scientific Evidence Generation and Psychological Research Methods in Postmodern Societies," Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration, Sciendo, vol. 24(2), pages 9-30, December.
    2. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & André Garenne & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2020. "Does newspapers coverage influence the citations count of scientific publications? An analysis of biomedical studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 413-427, April.
    3. Green, David A. & Simard-Duplain, Gaëlle & Sweetman, Arthur & Warburton, William P., 2023. "A Scientific Approach to Addressing Social Issues Using Administrative Data," IZA Policy Papers 199, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Briony Swire-Thompson & David Lazer, 2022. "Reducing Health Misinformation in Science: A Call to Arms," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 124-135, March.
    5. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Anuska Ferligoj & Sandra Miguel & Luka Kronegger & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2012. "Blockmodeling of co-authorship networks in library and information science in Argentina: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 699-717, December.
    6. Markus Lehmkuhl & Nikolai Promies, 2020. "Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, November.
    7. Anirban Ganguly & Debdeep Chatterjee & John Vail Farr, 2018. "Evaluating Barriers To Knowledge Sharing Affecting New Product Development Team Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-26, August.
    8. Robert Kirkby, 2023. "Quantitative Macroeconomics: Lessons Learned from Fourteen Replications," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(2), pages 875-896, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04646-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.