Updates and announcements from ASAPbio

ASAPbio Preprint Reviewer Recruitment network featuring logos of Review Commons, GigaScience, GigaByte, PeerJ, Proc B, JCB, MBoC, PLOS, eLife, and SAGE

Announcing the Preprint Reviewer Recruitment Network

Today, we’re excited to launch the Preprint Reviewer Recruitment Network, a pilot to share researchers’ preprint reviewing experience with journals looking for reviewers or editorial board members.  Public preprint feedback has the potential to not only help authors and readers, but also to identify potential reviewers and editorial board members for journals. Unfortunately, finding preprint…

FAST principles board

FAST principles to foster a positive preprint feedback culture

As Ivan Oransky has noted, ‘science is a proposition and a conversation and an argument’ [1]; feedback and discussion around scientific reports are integral parts of the scientific process. Preprints are a vehicle for this discussion as they allow any member of the community to read and feedback on the latest research. Despite the potential…

Review commons Extended Scooping Protection: Preprint posted, protected at 17 journals

Review Commons implements new policies on preprints and extended scoop protection

This post originally appeared on the Review Commons blog. Review Commons is announcing two new policies today: As of August 1, 2021, Review Commons will require all authors to post their manuscript as a preprint, prior to transfer to an affiliate journal1. In return, all the affiliate journals provide authors with scooping protection from the date of posting of the…

Why do some researchers have reservations about preprints? – ASAPbio March Community Call recap

The ASAPbio Community is a global and diverse group of researchers and other stakeholders in science communication. While they bring varied expertise and opinions, they all share an interest and support for the use of preprints. Our Community members had expressed interest in hearing a broader range of perspectives about preprints, beyond the pro-preprint views…

Resources for preprints in the public eye

Today, as described in Project Coordinator Jigisha’s Patel opinion piece in The Scientist, we’re pleased to share a series of resources and guidelines emerging from our work on the representation of preprints to broad audiences. These infographics summarize more detailed documents drafted by working groups who considered how to preprint servers, researchers, institutions, and journalists…

#PreprintsInThePublicEye Twitter poll results!

Last week we ran Twitter polls for preprint servers, research institutions, researchers and journalists to provide feedback on the outcomes of the Preprints in the Public Eye project. The project aim is to encourage the responsible reporting of research to avoid its misrepresentation or misinterpretation. The project involves stakeholders representing researchers, institutions, preprint servers, publishers…

Call for proposals to encourage preprint curation and peer review

Community feedback on preprints makes rapid science more robust. Review and commentary can help authors improve their articles; curation can provide readers with helpful context and enhance discoverability. But despite the benefits, barriers to reviewing and curating preprints remain. Potential reviewers and curators see few incentives to organize and comment on preprints, and reviews can…