Having dug a hole for myself on the issue of preprint reviews, I continue to dig deeper. I must confess that a patient friend crystallized my objections to me. I know a lot of people review preprints and papers equally diligently. However, I do not. 1/
I often do not review preprints from an evaluative eye the way I might for a journal. I usually 'review' them purely from the perspective of trying to make constructive suggestions on a story I'm interested in because it is cool and in my field. 2/
To that end, I raarely post public comments. Instead, I send unsolicited emails to the authors with my suggestions and objections. My reviews are not always 'easy'; occasionally they are tough and suggest more rigor in argument or experiment before submission to peer review 3/
I have no idea how these emails are viewed but I know that I appreciate them when someone takes the time to do this for one of our preprints. In that respect, I view preprints more like sharing my work with colleagues, soliciting their comments. 4/
Thus, I am all for preprint reviews and comments; indeed such generous comments have helped our work and hopefully will continue to do so. As practice, if I have semt preprint comments I prefer to not participate in the peer review of a paper at a journal. 5/
Why? I am not sure tbh. I see my job as an editor and reviewer at a journal to be thorough but also evaluative; does this meet the burden of prof; are all the controls in place etc. In some ways, my role as a commenter on preprints is much more desirable. 6/
I am not an 'adversary'; I am simply trying to give people comments to 'improve' their work and they are trying to do the same for me. Now I recognize that is me, and others do review both with the same eye. Its true that the review of both could be the same. 7/
Its just that I have not thrown that switch in my head, because I like this aspect of preprints the most. Yes, I get to share my work at a time of my choosing but I also get great advice for free and it comes with no strings attached (no 'or else' from reviewers at journals). 8/
Of course, this distinction as pointed out by my astute friend, is entirely of my choosing, but I do see my role as a journal reviewer to be distinct from a preprint reviewer. Perhaps it is not so different. But I hope it is. One I see as fun and the other an obligation fin/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
