Although preprints typically do not satisfy public access requirements from funders, they remain an important and effective way of publishing research openly. In the absence of policies that mandate or incentivize preprint publishing, their adoption is largely shaped by discipline-specific research culture and the practical advantages offered by this form of publishing.

Benefits of preprint publishing for researchers

• Speed: Preprint publishing is fast, especially when compared with traditional journals.
• Citable outputs: Preprint platforms, such as PsyArXiv, assign persistent identifiers like DOIs, making preprints fully citable.
• Early credit: Preprints help researchers, especially those early in their career, demonstrate productivity and establish precedence.
• Improving access: Posting a preprint increases accessibility by making an open access version of the work available.
• Foundation for peer review: Preprints provide an opportunity for early feedback and can be peer-reviewed through platforms such as Review Commons and PREreview.
• Documentation and verification: Versioning, timestamps, and persistent identifiers provide a transparent record of the publication.

Since disciplinary workflows and cultures play such an important role in preprints, it is important to have disciplinary preprint servers, such as PsyArXiv, that connect directly to their research communities and increase discoverability of the research.

Preprints and public access policies in the United States

In the United States, the 2022 Nelson memo from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy directed federal funding agencies to update their public access policies in order to improve the public’s access to taxpayer‑funded research. Over the past year, both the National Science Foundation and the NIH have updated their public access policies, and now require that peer‑reviewed publications be made freely and publicly available immediately upon publication, with no embargo, and in designated repositories. While posting a publicly accessible preprint on a server such as PsyArXiv does not satisfy these requirements, the policies do not prohibit researchers from publishing preprints. Private funders may have their own policies regarding preprint publishing.

Preprints in European Union policy

In the European Union (EU), the central funding framework programs play a major role in the development of open science. Starting with the Seventh Framework Program (FP7, 2007-2013) and continuing in the Horizon 2020 program (2014-2020), the rules governing the publication of research results have steadily expanded. The current funding program, Horizon Europe (2021-2027), requires open access publishing of findings from funded projects. However, this strict mandate (no embargos) only applies to the published version or the final peer-reviewed manuscript accepted for publication. This means that preprints that have not undergone peer-review do not, on their own, technically fulfill the requirements. However, preprints are explicitly mentioned and researchers are encouraged to openly publish them as a case of good scientific practice. 

The European Commission (EC) recommends “trusted repositories” for all forms of publication, and it’s interesting that arXiv is explicitly mentioned here as an example of such a platform. Those could either be explicitly certified or disciplinary-specific repositories commonly used and endorsed by the research communities. Such repositories should be recognised internationally. Not allowed in this context would be personal websites and databases, publisher websites, as well as cloud storage services. The EC also provides its own open access publishing venue where funded researchers across all disciplines can submit their publications with no author fees: Open Research Europe (ORE). Their terms of use expressly state that “articles previously posted on a preprint server, such as arXiv, SSRN, BioRxiv, MedRxiv can be submitted for publication in ORE.” 

Developments beyond the EU

From 2026 onwards, non-EU funding agencies are able to join ORE. Switzerland and Norway have taken this opportunity and their higher education institutions will be able to benefit from the diamond open access platform soon. Like the EU and the United States, Switzerland, the UK and Norway require articles from funded projects to be published open access without delay. Among these three countries, only the UK Research and Innovation open access policy mentions and explicitly encourages preprints while clarifying at the same time that preprints are not within the scope of the policy.  

Martin Boosen
Martin Boosen is Repository Manager for MPG.PuRe at Max Planck Information and Technology and Member of the PsyArXiv Member Advisory Board.

Melanie Gainey
Melanie Gainey is a STEM Librarian and Director of the Open Science Program at Carnegie Mellon University and Chair of the PsyArXiv Member Advisory Board.

Christine Krebs
Christine Krebs is Data Steward in the Open Science Team of the University Library of Bern and Member of the PsyArXiv Member Advisory Board.

The post Preprints: Where They Fit in Today’s Public Access Policy Landscape appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

The Center for Open Science (COS) has recently announced their decision to phase out OSF Projects, a tool where researchers could post their data, code, and materials to make them openly accessible. OSF Projects has been used by tens of thousands of psychologists to make their research more open and transparent, and its loss is greatly felt by our community.

Given this news, SIPS wants to share how we are approaching our support of open infrastructure, specifically with respect to PsyArXiv, which is maintained by SIPS and currently hosted on the OSF. Below, we provide answers to anticipated questions that the community will have about PsyArXiv.

FAQs about PsyArXiv

1. Do the changes with OSF Projects affect PsyArXiv?

Changes with OSF Projects do not impact posting preprints on PsyArXiv. However, after the OSF Projects phase-out period concludes, users will no longer be able to connect an OSF Project with a PsyArXiv preprint. Users will still have the option to link open data, code, and materials hosted elsewhere to their PsyArXiv preprints. 

2. Is PsyArXiv run by OSF or the Center for Open Science?

No. PsyArXiv is run and maintained by SIPS volunteers. A team of moderators oversee the daily operations of the service and handle about 100 submissions each day. Policy decisions are made by the PsyArXiv Scientific Advisory Board; Scientific Advisory Board members are approved by the SIPS Executive Committee.

3. Who owns PsyArXiv?

PsyArXiv operates under a detailed governance structure, which is headed by its Scientific Advisory Board. SIPS is responsible for hosting the server and pays for costs associated with it via funds raised specifically for PsyArXiv from member institutions and generous donors. We post updates about the service and its policies to our blog.

4. What platform does PsyArXiv currently use?

PsyArXiv is currently hosted on the Open Science Framework (OSF), which means authors use the OSF to upload preprints and readers go to the OSF website to download preprints. OSF-hosted preprint services are separate from OSF Projects; only OSF Projects is being impacted by the recent announcement.

5. Do PsyArXiv users need to worry about the preservation of their work or the future of the preprint service? 

All preprints on PsyArXiv will continue to exist in perpetuity. Around 100 new papers are submitted to PsyArXiv each day, and volunteer moderators work hard to get submissions that meet our posting guidelines approved as quickly as possible. Once approved by a trained moderator, submissions receive a DOI and are maintained indefinitely. Volunteers from SIPS and PsyArXiv are continuously working to financially sustain the service through grants, memberships, and donations to ensure that PsyArXiv is an outlet for open psychological research products for many years to come.

6. How can I get involved with PsyArXiv or share my feedback?

You can reach the PsyArXiv team by email at psyarxiv@improvingpsych.org for general feedback on our preprint service. We would also be pleased to receive expressions of interest to join our team of moderators at this form. If you are employed at an academic institution and would like someone from our fundraising team to inquire about your institution becoming a member, please reach out to psyarxiv_funding@improvingpsych.org. 

The post What Researchers Need to Know about PsyArXiv Given Upcoming Changes to OSF Projects appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

===

Due to an issue with OSF, PsyArXiv is currently only able to “accept” manuscripts. If papers need to be revised before acceptance – for instance, due to not meeting our server’s policies (https://blog.psyarxiv.com/about-psyarxiv/), we will hold them in our queue until the OSF implements a fix.

We currently expect a fix the week of May 4, and we will update our status as we get more information on a timeline.

The post Update: PsyArXiv Now Returning to Normal Operations appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

From March 2026, moderators have added additional checks to ensure that authors have complied with all the terms of service for PsyArXiv. Moderators will also use authors’ past publication record to establish scholarly expertise for formats such as reviews, case studies, opinion pieces, etc. or topics where moderators have less experience, such as theories of consciousness, linguistics, philosophy, psychiatry, computational theory, etc. Such formats and topics require more specialist knowledge to establish whether they are in scope as scientific psychology, and what their scholarly contribution represents; hence, submissions cannot be evaluated by moderators in only a few minutes, and we rely on established scholarship to inform decisions. Submissions also need to be complete enough that they represent an independent contribution to the field of psychology, so slide decks and working papers presented as notes or research proposals or with incomplete methods will no longer be accepted into the archive, as they also require more than a few minutes to evaluate. We encourage authors to use OSF projects to record and version work-in-progress. However, PsyArXiv continues to accept stage 1 registered reports, where they pass standard checks for well-crafted registered reports. 

Authors can help by clearly stating their affiliations on the first page; ensuring that all metadata (title, authors and abstract) match the submission exactly; by including a contact e-mail address; adding author notes with ORCIDs and funding information; and for submissions presenting primary or secondary data, details of the institutional review board record at the start also speed up moderation. For student work contributing submissions with primary data, we encourage adding supervisors as co-authors with their permission and adding a CRediT statement. Where authors feel that their submission meets all the criteria but was still rejected, they can appeal moderator decisions, and the moderation supervision team will give the submission further consideration.

Please refer to PsyArXiv’s policies page (https://blog.psyarxiv.com/about-psyarxiv/) and frequently asked questions (https://blog.psyarxiv.com/faq-frequently-asked-questions/) for more information about the moderation process and how to appeal.

We are always looking for volunteers to join the moderation team. If you are interested, please reach out via psyarxiv@improvingpsych.org.

Thank you to everyone contributing to PsyArXiv
– The PsyArXiv team

The post Updates to PsyArXiv moderation policies appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

Some functions that could be used by searchers include boolean operators, nesting, truncation, fuzzy matching, phrasing, and filtering (post-query refinement). These functions are described in the table below.

OSF has more information on their current search syntax available on the following webpage: https://help.osf.io/article/588-getting-started-with-osf-search#Refine-Results-Using-Special-Search-Syntax-YbtIb

As mentioned above, search guidance on a given platform is often a snapshot in time. Platforms make changes, and ideally those changes are well documented so users can make search strategy adjustments. Some librarians are committed to monitoring syntax changes, and the OSF platform is included in this syntax table: https://lib.uvic.ca/preprintsearchsyntax (Premji & Riegelman, 2026).

Amy Riegelman
Amy Riegelman is a Social Sciences and Evidence Synthesis Librarian at University of Minnesota and a member of the PsyArXiv Member Advisory Board.

The post How to search for PsyArXiv preprints on the OSF platform appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

Some of the major sources where readers can discover content from PsyArXiv include:

• Google and Google Scholar
• Europe PMC (Note that PubMed Central (PMC) does not currently index PsyArXiv content)
• OpenAlex
• Dimensions
• The Lens
• Core
• OSF Preprints – an aggregated search of all preprint servers hosted by OSF, including PsyArXiv
• Crossref Metadata Search
• ORCID – if you associate your preprint with your ORCID, it will automatically appear in your profile
• Clarivate Preprint Citation Index

This list will likely grow in the future as preprints are increasingly incorporated into discovery tools. For example, Scopus began indexing preprints from selected sources in 2023, although it currently does not index content from PsyArXiv.

Andrea Schuler

Andrea Schuler is the Head of Open Scholarship & Research Data at Tisch Library, Tufts University, and a member of the PsyArXiv Member Advisory Board.

The post Discovering research from PsyArXiv appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

We have now resumed normal operations, which means you can expect any newly posted or edited preprint to be moderated within 24-72 hours of submission. If you post a new preprint (or create a new version of an existing preprint), please be sure to follow the policies to ensure a smooth moderation process.

If your existing preprint is still pending moderation, it is likely that a moderator found an issue which will require an update before it can be approved. The most common issues are a mismatch between the information listed on the paper (e.g., title, author names, author order) and the preprint metadata (the information that is entered into the PsyArXiv system). You can speed up the approval of any preprints with these issues by editing the preprint file and/or preprint metadata to comply with PsyArXiv’s requirements.

The post PsyArXiv Returns to Normal Operations appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

Since its inception, PsyArXiv has operated in a post-moderation system with informal policies and guidelines to help authors improve their contributions to our server. However, the recent increase in the volume of low-quality and out-of-scope contributions to PsyArXiv has precipitated a need for changes to how PsyArXiv moderates its preprints. Since August 19, 2025, PsyArXiv has moved to a pre-moderation workflow, meaning that submitted preprints will not be publicly available until they have been approved by the moderation team. Once activities have normalized, we expect moderation to take 24-72 hours. 

You can find our updated policies here. 

The post Update to PsyArXiv Policies appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

What happened?

As you may be aware, PsyArXiv has been receiving an influx of low-quality submissions, and the rate of these submissions has increased substantially in the last few weeks. This influx has made it necessary to transition PsyArXiv from a post-moderation system (where submitted preprints were immediately publicly available, but still marked as “pending” until moderation) to a pre-moderation system (where preprints are not available until after moderation). 

The publication of inappropriate submissions in PsyArXiv is problematic for a few reasons. First, once submissions are published, they receive a DOI, which means PsyArXiv and the related page remains accessible permanently. This is true even if the submission is subsequently withdrawn. Although withdrawn files are removed, a DOI will already have been minted (and paid for), and hosting the related webpage will continue to consume resources. When this was happening only occasionally, post-moderation was a reasonable alternative; now that the rate of problematic submissions has increased, it is no longer viable. Second, these submissions can take a while to be moderated, and while they stay up, they degrade the reputation of PsyArXiv. The move to pre-moderation has successfully contained these issues, and we’re beginning to see a decline in these types of submissions.

A consequence of the move to pre-moderation is that any existing but unmoderated submissions, which were previously publicly available, are now inaccessible to the public. Normally this would not be an issue, as moderation is supposed to take about 24-72 hours. However, because PsyArXiv was using post-moderation, not enough emphasis was placed in making moderation as speedy as would be required in a pre-moderation system. PsyArXiv (and moderation in particular) is run entirely by volunteers, and correctly allocating what few resources we have is sometimes a gamble. In this case, we were not able to anticipate that we would need to move to pre-moderation fast enough, and were not able to clear the significant backlog of unmoderated submissions before making this change, for which we apologize.

What happens next?

The PsyArXiv Team is working around the clock to get through the moderation backlog and return PsyArXiv to its full functionality. We are currently scaling up our moderation team to be able to clear the existing backlog as quickly as possible. Unmoderated preprints are being handled in a semi-random order by volunteers, and we expect the current backlog to be cleared in 3-4 weeks. Unfortunately, this means that your previously-public preprint may become accessible again tomorrow, or in 3-4 weeks, but most likely, at some point in between.

We understand how frustrating that can be – many people, if not everyone, in the PsyArXiv team have also had many of their preprints become inaccessible. We ask for your patience, and please know we all care deeply about keeping PsyArXiv functioning at its best. 

If you would like to sign up to become a PsyArXiv moderator, now or in the future, here is the link for that. 

If there is a specific preprint that you urgently need to be made available for a specific reason, please email psyarxiv@improvingpsych.org with the subject line “Urgent Moderation Request” and include the link, DOI, or the OSF identifier to your preprint (e.g., ab3de_v1) and a brief explanation for your request. Please remember that moderating specific preprints takes longer than just moving through the moderation queue, so we request that you only do this if it’s really necessary.

Thank you again for your patience,

The PsyArXiv Team

The post Changes to Moderation at PsyArXiv Preprints appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.

In practice, what does this mean for you when you’re uploading a preprint? For PsyArXiv, it won’t make much of a difference at all. You’ll still be able to upload your preprints in the same way, and upload updated versions when you need to. The only difference is that any new manuscript versions will have a different DOI to the original version.  If you are only making a change to the manuscript metadata, that won’t lead to a new DOI being minted. 

Because PsyArXiv uses a post-moderation approach, any submitted preprints will still go live immediately, and will then later go through a moderation process by our moderation team. 

DOI versioning may have an impact on your current use if you need to withdraw a preprint from PsyArXiv. For example, you might find yourself submitting to a journal that does not permit preprinting (*I guess these still exist somewhere?). When you submit a withdrawal request, it will relate to a specific version. So, if you need to ensure that all versions of a preprint are removed, you’ll need to communicate this request to PsyArXiv (e.g., submitting a withdrawal request for each version) or COS support. 

If DOI versioning isn’t going to make things different for users, you might wonder why you’d want to have different DOIs for different versions of a preprint. Well, having DOI versioning has been recommended by Crossref’s Preprint Metadata Advisory Group (see here:, Section 5.2.2 in particular), and is seen as best practice that supports an open peer review model to track review feedback and changes to the paper over time. For example, you could have an overlay journal that could use DOI versioning to track original submissions, an updated version in response to reviewer comments, and a final version accepted for publication. Another advantage is that translations of articles can have their own DOI, and different translated versions can be linked using appropriate meta-data. So, all in all, DOI versioning allows for more flexibility and opens up new possibilities for communities in terms of open reviewing. 

If you’d like a little more detail on creating a new article version, take a look at the OSF’s help guide here, and here for some more information on how DOI versioning relates to new approaches to peer review. 

I hope the above information is useful – Happy preprinting!

Dermot Lynott is an Associate Professor at Maynooth University, and the current chair of the PsyArXiv Scientific Advisory Board.

The post New to PsyArXiv: DOI Versioning appeared first on PsyArXiv Blog.