Papers sent to PLOS journals will be automatically uploaded to the preprint server before acceptance.

In 2017, scientists, regulators, and publishers clashed in a series of lawsuits, boycotts, mass resignations, and more.

Two manuscripts published without methods point to the importance of community policing on preprint archives.

We suggest a centralized facility for submitting to journals—one that would benefit scientists and not only publishers.

An NIH survey of 351 individuals in the research community has shown that many are supportive of interim research products like preprints.

In an agency first, the National Institutes of Health provides guidance on citing certain non-peer-reviewed publications in agency proposals and reports.

Major research funding agencies lend their support to an ASAPbio-led effort to streamline the banking of non–peer-reviewed manuscripts in the life sciences.

As ASAPbio and individual life scientists respond to FASEB’s statement against the inclusion of preprints in NIH grant applications, more than 600 researchers sign a petition in support of citing these non peer-reviewed works in such proposals.

With its recruitment of dedicated “preprint editors,” PLOS Genetics makes official the practice of soliciting non-peer–reviewed manuscripts posted online. 

As the NIH questions the place of preprints in grant applications, the U.K.’s MRC encourages scientists to submit non-peer–reviewed works for consideration.