In the debate about eprints we thought that everbody’s opinion had been heard except that of authors.

To remedy this we asked the corresponding authors of the last 50 original research articles  in the BMJ, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine to complete a questionnaire on the topic.

In summary, authors feel inhibited by current journal policies, would consider posting their articles on eprint servers if journal policies changed, and are in favour of  self archiving their articles on institutional or personal websites after publication in a peer reviewed journal.
 
 

1. In which ways do you disseminate the results of your research before formal publication?  (select all that apply)

Conferences: 41

Paper preprints: 9

Electronic preprints (eprints) by email: 1

Electronic preprints (eprints) by the world wide web: 0
 
 

2. Some peer reviewed journals will not publish articles that have previously been circulated as eprints.  How important is this to you when deciding your own practice regarding eprints?

Very important: 28

Quite important: 8

Neither important nor unimportant: 3

Quite unimportant: 4

Very unimportant: 0
 
 

3. If prior publication of eprints did not predjudice acceptance of articles by peer reviewed journals, what would your attitude to eprints be?

Strongly in favour: 4

In favour: 18

Neither in favour of nor against: 14

Against: 3

Strongly against: 4
 
 

4. If prior publication of eprints did not prejudice acceptance of articles by peer reviewed journals, would you consider posting your articles on an eprint server?

Yes: 24

No: 19
 
 

5. Your recently published article appears on the BMJ's (Lancet's, NEJM's),  web site. What is your attitude to authors being allowed to post their published articles on their institutional or personal web sites?

Strongly in favour: 14

In favour: 21

Neither in favour of nor against: 5

Against: 3

Strongly against: 0