We should publicly acknowledge the effort a researcher spends in reviewing and enable the reviewer to take public responsibility for the content of the review he/she writes to help the authors to improve their work. Research should be, indeed, and open and public dialogue and should not be constrained by established practices that go against Open Science principles. I think this initiative is one of the first attempts providing and international and inclusive forum to work towards a more transparent reviewing process.

Silvio Peroni
Silvio PeroniAssociate Professor, University of Bologna

I chose to sign the pledge because reviews are part of the scientific process and should be freely available. Publish Your Reviews will both benefit readers by providing discussion around the findings and research context, and authors by promoting focused, appropriate, specific and transparent principles.

Alizee Malnoe
Alizée MalnoëAssociate Professor, Umeå University

Open publication of peer reviews supports adhering to important principles of good research such as transparency and openness, and improve giving due credit to peer reviewers for their contributions. By supporting the Publish Your Reviews pledge, I, as an early career researcher choose a path for my approach to peer reviews and encourage other researchers to join us in improving this essential components of the scholarly publication process.

Mohammad Hosseini
Mohammad HosseiniPostdoctoral Researcher, Northwestern University

“I chose to post a preprint as a way of sharing of findings earlier. It is important because a preprint is accessible online before the review process is completed. Furthermore, a preprint can be cited and readers can comment on it. The comments may be incorporated when the author is addressing reviewers’ remarks.”

AUTHOR OF Knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding rabies and its control among dog owners in Kigali city, Rwanda

Pie Ntampaka, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Rwanda, Nyagatare, Rwanda

“We decided to publish our paper as a pre-print to enable other colleagues to comment on our paper before it was peer-reviewed and published. Compared to the usual process of waiting a long time before being able to share your work, publishing in a preprint really gave us the opportunity to quickly share our findings and make necessary changes if needed.”

AUTHOR OF Body mass index trajectories preceding first report of poor self-rated health: A longitudinal case-control analysis of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing

Daniel Borch Ibsen, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

“In cancer research, every second matters! Molecular data analysis has the power to discover new drug targets and repurpose existing drugs for new cancer application. The results from such an analysis that hold in them this type of power should be shared early and often.“

AUTHOR OF NOJAH: Not Just Another Heatmap for genome-wide cluster analysis

Jeanne Kowalski-Muegge, LIVESTRONG Cancer Institutes, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin

“What we are doing is cardiac tissue engineering. It helps us to create experimental models for the study of the most dangerous, potentially lethal cardiac arrhythmia. I believe that sharing results early with the scientific community on bioRxiv helps in the preparation of final research reports.”

AUTHOR OF Self-organization of conducting pathways explains electrical wave propagation in cardiac tissues with high fraction of non-conducting cells

Konstantin Agladze, Laboratory of Biophysics of Excitable Systems, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Dolgoprudny, Russia

“I am a great fan of open access publishing. It is important to make our work accessible to everybody out there, ideally as soon as it is ready. Hence, I support bioRxiv and regularly upload our preprints… I feel it is the time to decide by ourselves when the results are ready to be released.”

profile photo with head and neck of Frank Schnorrer
Frank Schnorrer, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany, Aix Marseille University, CNRS, IBDM, Marseille, France

“Posting a preprint to bioRxiv is extremely beneficial: it gets the results to our community faster so we can accelerate progress. It also clearly provides an initial metric of the interest in and impact of our findings. Coupled with publication in PLOS Pathogens and its rigorous review process, our colleagues can quickly benefit from, and have confidence in, the discoveries and our interpretations.”

AUTHOR OF Plasmodium male gametocyte development and transmission area critically regulated by the two putative deadenylases of the CAF1/CCR4/NOT complex

head and neck profile image of Scott Eugene Lindner
Scott Eugene Lindner, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Center for Malaria Research, Pennsylvania State University, USA

“[Posting a preprint to bioRxiv] was an important step for us to gauge the response from our peers before final publication. [Our short report] is a controversial study, not in terms of design or execution, but in terms of interpretation. It was therefore essential that all parties had access to the findings and could give feedback to us as authors.”

AUTHOR OF If a fish can pass the mark test, what are the implications for consciousness and self-awareness testing in animals?

Alex Jordan, Laboratory of Animal Sociology, Department of Biology and Geosciences, Osaka City University, Osaka, Japan, Department of Collective Behaviour, Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, Konstanz, Germany

“I posted a preprint to bioRxiv when I submitted to PLOS Genetics because I wanted to share our story with scientific community. At submission, I believed we had a complete story that would interest researchers working on various aspects of adhesion biology. I knew that the story would likely develop further after peer review, but I wanted to share the core results with the community.”

AUTHOR OF Evolutionary rate covariation analysis of E-cadherin identifies Raskol as a regulator of cell adhesion and actin dynamics in Drosophila

Adam Kwiatkowski, Department of Cell Biology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

“Publishing a preprint is a great way to get feedback as early as possible from the community. We actually improved the final version of our paper not only based on the great reviews we received from the formal peer review process, but also based on the feedback we learned through Twitter, and other channels.”

AUTHOR OF elPrep 4: A multithreaded framework for sequence analysis

Charlotte Herzeel, ExaScience Life Lab, IMEC, Leuven, Belgium