Below, we describe how preprints can be included in REF submissions, with extracts from the official REF guidance. <\/p>\n
Preprints are valid research outputs for REF2021<\/h1>\n
Research outputs count towards 60% of an institution\u2019s REF score, and each researcher must provide at least one and no more than five outputs to demonstrate the quality of the institution or unit\u2019s work from 2014 to 2020. <\/p>\n
Preprints are eligible for submission as outputs to REF2021:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe funding bodies recognise that many researchers derive value from sharing early versions of papers using a pre-print service. Institutions may submit pre-prints as eligible outputs to REF 2021 (see Annex K).\u201d<\/em> \u2013 Paragraph 238 of the REF Guidance on Submissions, PDF available from https:\/\/www.ref.ac.uk\/media\/1092\/ref-2019_01-guidance-on-submissions.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Preprints are referred to as \u201cworking papers\u201d in Annex K and described as \u201cResearch papers disseminated to encourage discussion and suggestions for revision. This may be through pre-print dissemination, lodging in an institutional repository or self-publication for distribution.\u201d In Annex K, the process of research itself is also defined: \u201ca process of investigation leading to new insights, effectively shared\u201d. Other outputs eligible for REF include book chapters, conference contributions, patent applications, software and journal articles.<\/p>\n Consider the manuscript(s) you would submit to a journal close to the REF2021 submission deadline. Is this work that you would count amongst your five best outputs in 2014-2020 but it\u2019s not likely to be published in a peer-reviewed journal before the submission deadline? If so, consider preprinting this work in order to be able to cite it for REF. <\/p>\n Outputs can be updated before final REF submission. <\/strong>Using preprints to demonstrate productivity may help relieve the time pressure of being published in any journal before the REF deadline<\/a>. You may be able to update the version submitted to REF between your institution\u2019s initial and final submissions: \u201cWhere a deposited output is later replaced or augmented following its initial deposit, the updated manuscript may be deposited in place of the originally deposited output.\u201d (Paragraph 240, REF Guidance on Submissions).<\/p>\n Preprints do not count towards the REF open access requirement.<\/strong> For a research output posted on a preprint server to count towards the open access requirement, it must be the version of the manuscript accepted for publication (Paragraph 238, REF Guidance on Submissions; see also https:\/\/unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk\/?p=2115<\/a>). Notably, bioRxiv discourages posting the version of a manuscript that has been accepted for publication at a journal (see https:\/\/www.biorxiv.org\/about-biorxiv<\/a>), while several community-moderated OSF Preprints servers do accept author-accepted manuscripts, otherwise known as post-prints. <\/p>\n Only outputs which have been \u2018accepted for publication\u2019 (such as a journal article or conference contribution with an ISSN) are within the scope of the REF 2021 open access policy. To take into account that the policy intent for \u2018open access\u2019 is met where a pre-print version is the same as the author-accepted manuscript, we have introduced additional flexibility into the open access requirement: if the \u2018accepted for publication\u2019 text, or near final version, is available on the pre-print service, and the output upload date of the pre-print is prior to the date of output publication, this will be considered as compliant with the open access criteria (deposit, discovery, and access).\u201d<\/em> \u2013 Paragraph 238 of the REF Guidance on Submissions, PDF available from https:\/\/www.ref.ac.uk\/media\/1092\/ref-2019_01-guidance-on-submissions.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n Any research output may only be included in one REF cycle<\/strong> unless there have been substantial modifications, so any work included in REF2014 may not also be submitted for REF2021. This rule applies regardless of the version of work: any preprint included in REF2014 cannot be included in REF2021, even if the peer-reviewed version (i.e. journal publication) is now available. The same may apply for REF2021 and any future exercise, although the policy details for any future exercise have not been developed. Consider whether any preprint posted before the submission deadline for REF2021 would still be an output that you may wish to submit for a future assessment exercise (for example, in seven years\u2019 time).<\/p>\n \u201cAn output first published in its final form during the REF 2021 publication period that was \u2018pre-published\u2019 in the previous publication period \u2013 whether in full in a different form (for example, as a pre-print), or as a preliminary version or working paper \u2013 is eligible for submission to the REF, provided that the \u2018pre-published\u2019 output was not submitted to REF 2014.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 Paragraph 258, REF Guidance on Submissions<\/p>\n As with all research outputs, if the author has moved institution, REF provides guidance on which institution should reference the preprinted output in their REF submission (see Paragraph 214, REF Guidance on Submissions).<\/p>\n According to the REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods (PDF available from https:\/\/www.ref.ac.uk\/publications\/panel-criteria-and-working-methods-201902\/<\/a>), \u201c[the] sub-panels will assess the quality of submitted research outputs in terms of their \u2018originality, significance and rigour\u2019, with reference to international research quality standards.\u201d <\/p>\n The general principle of REF is that preprints should be treated fairly in comparison to other outputs:<\/p>\n \u201c<\/em>Does the REF assessment process distinguish between research outputs on the basis of mode of publication, place [of] publication or publisher?<\/em><\/strong> No. The REF is governed by a principle of equity and is committed to the fair and equal assessment of all types of research and forms of research output.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 https:\/\/www.ref.ac.uk\/about\/faqs\/<\/a><\/p>\n Dr Kim Hackett, REF Director, tells us, \u201cThe principle of equity (all types of research and all forms of research output across all disciplines shall be assessed on a fair and equal basis) is one of three principles governing the conduct of the REF. The assessment structures we have in place for the REF support the delivery of these principles, with a key role of the main panels being to ensure the consistent application of the assessment standards and criteria.\u201d<\/p>\n Specifically, the guidance states that outputs will not be judged by their place of publication or form of output:<\/p>\n \u201cThe main panels welcome all forms of research output that fulfil the eligibility criteria for the REF (set out in Part 3, Section 2 of \u2018Guidance on submissions\u2019). All forms of output, in any language, will be considered equitably, with no distinction being made between the type of research or form of output submitted. The sub-panels will neither advantage nor disadvantage any type of research or form of output. The main panels encourage submitting institutions to refer to the glossary of output types for information on the categories under which outputs may be submitted for assessment (see \u2018Guidance on submissions\u2019, Annex K).\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cNo sub-panel will use journal impact factors or any hierarchy of journals in their assessment of outputs. No output will be privileged or disadvantaged on the basis of the publisher, where it is published or the medium of its publication.\u201d<\/em> \u2013 Paragraphs 206-207, REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods.<\/p>\n The information provided in the survey of intended submissions later this year will be used to inform further appointments of sub-panel members and assessors, in order to \u201censure submissions are assessed by panellists with appropriate expertise\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\n Finally, all panel members and assessors will receive training on unconscious bias, as part of efforts by REF to promote equality and diversity in careers (see Paragraph 45, REF Guidance on Submissions).<\/p>\n While research outputs determine the largest proportion of the REF score, 25% of the score is assigned based on impact of the research. To assess this, institutions prepare impact case studies including up to six references and detailing impact based on:<\/p>\n Has a preprint influenced the impact of your work?<\/strong> Consider whether the preprinted version of your manuscript has contributed towards the reach and significance of a particularly high impact piece of work produced between 1 August 2013 \u2013 31 July 2020. If so, advise the person who prepares your institution\u2019s impact case studies. <\/p>\n This may be less likely to apply when your preprint posting date is close to the REF submission deadline. Nevertheless, you could take note of any major contributions of sharing the preprint of your manuscript to the reach and significance of the impact of your work, as evidence for REF2021 or a later assessment exercise.<\/p>\n The next REF will be in 2021, and institutions are now preparing their submissions: [the survey of submissions intentions opens in September 2019 and is to be completed by December 2019](https:\/\/www.ref.ac.uk\/publications\/institutions-invited-to-complete-the-ref-survey-of-submission-intentions\/<\/a>). Final submissions to REF2021 are due late November 2020.<\/p>\n Research outputs count towards 60% of an institution\u2019s REF score. For REF2021, outputs must have been produced between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2020. The institution selects the best outputs for inclusion in the institution\u2019s portfolio, with the total number of outputs submitted equal to 2.5 times the number of full-time equivalent staff \u2018with significant responsibility for research\u2019 and with 1 to 5 outputs submitted per included staff member. The process of selection may begin with each researcher considering their five best research outputs in the 2014-2020 period, although this depends on how your research institution manages the process.<\/p>\n For life and biomedical sciences (REF Panel group A), outputs will be assessed for degree of excellence (star rating) using criteria including \u201cscientific rigour and excellence, with regard to design, method, execution and analysis\u201d, \u201csignificant addition to knowledge and to the conceptual framework of the field\u201d, \u201cthe scale, challenge and logistical difficulty posed by the research\u201d and \u201capplicability and significance to the relevant service users and research users\u201d (for full criteria, see Paragraph 198, REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods). Further, reproducible science and other best practices are explicitly welcomed by this panel, including the use of registered reports and sharing data sets, materials and analytic code (Paragraph 200, REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods). <\/p>\n The life and biomedical sciences panels \u201cwill use citation information, where appropriate and available, as part of the indication of academic significance to inform their assessment of output quality\u201d (Paragraph 201, REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods), with the guidance that citation data is seen as only one indicator and one that is not always reliable, absence of citations is not an indicator of lack of quality, citation data has implications in terms of equality, and that any panels using citation data will be receive further guidance from the Forum for Responsible Research Metrics (see Paragraphs 246-247, REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods).<\/p>\n After outputs (60%) and impact (25%), the remaining 15% of an institution\u2019s REF score is based on the research environment \u201cin terms of its \u2018vitality and sustainability\u2019, including the approach to enabling impact from its research, and its contribution to the vitality and sustainability of the wider discipline or research base.\u201d \u2013 REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods<\/p>\n Full guidance documentation on REF2021 is available from https:\/\/www.ref.ac.uk\/guidance\/<\/a>, including:<\/p>\n Note that in REF documentation, preprints are referred to as \u201cpre-prints\u201d and \u201cworking papers\u201d.<\/p>\n All documentation was accessed and quoted as of July 31 \u2013 August 1, 2019. We advise all researchers check the REF guidance directly for confirmation and updates.<\/p>\n \u2014<\/p>\n We thank Dr Stephen Eglen (Reader in Computational Neuroscience, University of Cambridge) and others for discussions, advice and information.<\/em><\/p>\n 2019-08-09 \u2013 This post was updated to:<\/em><\/p>\n In conversations about preprints in the UK, the question is often raised: \u2018are preprints included in REF?\u2019 In brief: yes. This is most likely to be applicable for any research […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[44],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3547","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-preprints"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3547"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3547\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3548,"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3547\/revisions\/3548"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3547"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3547"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/asapbio.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Should I submit a preprint as an output to REF2021?<\/h1>\n
How will preprints be evaluated as outputs for REF2021? <\/h1>\n
How else could preprints count in REF2021?<\/h1>\n
\n
About REF2021<\/h1>\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lh5.googleusercontent.com\/JC_EfNGM7qZ_t1EU5N9d8DpdiP6HT8txtHOjB7U1clC0MtvtO3LFGwuQl9l_GrBe9JR3siyc0lLJWjVw5Krbf724nnEKl2eE4nZDakqTqRmC7gNX2mTAK5PMjdQcYR0DeXlM2qQi\")