Why preprint servers are increasing moderation — and what that means for researchers

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted scholarly communication, speeding up data sharing, peer review, and the use of preprints, which allow scientists to share research quickly and openly. However, the rise of AI-generated content and unreliable science has led preprint platforms to tighten their quality checks. Moderators face the challenge of balancing rapid sharing with protecting against flawed research. Researchers like Natascha Chtena and Alice Fleerackers have studied these moderation practices, noting that while they aim to maintain quality, they sometimes reject legitimate work, which can hinder open science. This raises concerns about how much moderation is appropriate. Preprint servers, designed to share research before peer review, emphasize speed and accessibility, avoiding judgments on quality. John Inglis, co-founder of bioRxiv and medRxiv, stresses that while they check for reliability, they leave scientific evaluation to the community. The challenge is maintaining this balance as moderation becomes more complex. QUESTION: How might increased moderation of preprints impact the future of scientific research and innovation?