The survey, completed by nearly 1800 biomedical researchers in the United States and Canada in early 2025, reveals substantial variations in the use of preprinting. Two-thirds of respondents read at least one preprint during the previous 2 years. Only about half of respondents had submitted one in that time span, and only one-third had cited a preprint. Junior scientists were more likely to embrace these practices.

Among respondents not reading or citing preprints, the most common reason was concerns over quality. Among all survey takers, 42% predicted a strongly negative effect on science from preprints that spread misinformation. In comments submitted with their survey answers, some respondents voiced strong reservations about the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI).

Only about 16% of respondents agreed strongly that preprints reduce the importance that professional evaluators – those who review grant applications or make hiring and tenure decisions – place on articles in subscription-based, selective, peer-reviewed journals. Shifting away from traditional journals is a goal that advocates of open science have touted and some funders have embraced.

Source https://www.science.org/content/article/career-effects-preprints-get-mixed-reviews-biomedical-researchers

Another high-profile case has interested scientists. Read now