New site pits 'published' vs. 'posted'

Nature Precedings raises questions over the value of sharing findings before submitting to peer review

Andrea Gawrylewski
Jun 18, 2007
Scientists can now post preliminary, non-peer-reviewed findings on a new Nature Web site, but will doing so help -- or hurt -- their odds of getting published and promoted? Alma Swan, co-founder of Key Perspectives, a scholarly communication consulting firm, said it's still unclear how other scientists will view data published on the new site, called Nature Precedings. If a candidate is being evaluated by a tenure review board and has a high number of citations on Precedings, Swan asked, how much do those citations reflect on the candidate's merit, in comparison to citations in other publications? It's also too soon to tell how other journals will treat data that appeared on Precedings -- for instance, if they will consider Precedings data as published, and consequently hesitate to publish any later iterations of the findings, Diane Lang, Vice President of the Council of Science Editors, told...
The ScientistThe ScientistNature PrecedingsPrecedingsPrecedingsThe ScientistPrecedingsNatureThe ScientistPrecedingspeer-reviewPrecedingsPrecedingsPrecedingsPrecedingsIngelfinger RuleScienceScienceNature PrecedingsNature Precedings PrecedingsPrecedingsPrecedingsNatureNature Precedingsheremail@the-scientist.com Precedings Scientist Editor

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?