Citations to arXiv Preprints by Indexed Journals and Their Impact on Research Evaluation

  • Ferrer-Sapena, Antonia ;
  • Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael ;
  • Peset, Fernanda ;
  • Sanchez-Perez, Enrique A.
  • Received : 2018.05.03
  • Accepted : 2018.09.12
  • Published : 2018.12.30


This article shows an approach to the study of two fundamental aspects of the prepublication of scientific manuscripts in specialized repositories (arXiv). The first refers to the size of the interaction of "standard papers" in journals appearing in the Web of Science (WoS)-now Clarivate Analytics-and "non-standard papers" (manuscripts appearing in arXiv). Specifically, we analyze the citations found in the WoS to articles in arXiv. The second aspect is how publication in arXiv affects the citation count of authors. The question is whether or not prepublishing in arXiv benefits authors from the point of view of increasing their citations, or rather produces a dispersion, which would diminish the relevance of their publications in evaluation processes. Data have been collected from arXiv, the websites of the journals, Google Scholar, and WoS following a specific ad hoc procedure. The number of citations in journal articles published in WoS to preprints in arXiv is not large. We show that citation counts from regular papers and preprints using different sources (arXiv, the journal's website, WoS) give completely different results. This suggests a rather scattered picture of citations that could distort the citation count of a given article against the author's interest. However, the number of WoS references to arXiv preprints is small, minimizing this potential negative effect.


preprint;research evaluation;arXiv;impact;bibliometric analysis;citation


  1. Ardichvili, A., Page, V., & Wentling, T. (2003). Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledgesharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 64-77.
  2. Bar-Ilan, J. (2014). Astrophysics publications on arXiv, Scopus and Mendeley: A case study. Scientometrics, 100(1), 217-225.
  3. Bohlin, I. (2004). Communication regimes in competition: The current transition in scholarly communication seen through the lens of the sociology of technology. Social Studies of Science, 34(3), 365-391.
  4. Confrey, E. A. (1996). The information exchange groups experiment. Publishing Research Quarterly, 12(3), 37-39.
  5. Davis, P. M., & Fromerth, M. J. (2007). Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? Scientometrics, 71(2), 203-215.
  6. Fowler, K. K. (2011). Mathematicians' views on current publishing issues: A survey of researchers. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 67. Retrieved November 2, 2018 from
  7. Haque, A. U., & Ginsparg, P. (2009). Positional effects on citation and readership in arXiv. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2203-2218.
  8. Haque, A. U., & Ginsparg, P. (2010). Last but not least: Additional positional effects on citation and readership in arXiv. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2381-2388.
  9. Haustein, S. (2016). Grand challenges in altmetrics: Heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies. Sciento metrics, 108(1), 413-423.
  10. Henneken, E. A., Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Thompson, D., & Murray, S. S. (2006). Effect of e-printing on citation rates in astronomy and physics. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 9(2). Retrieved November 2, 2018 from;view=fulltext.
  11. Kim, J. (2011). Motivations of faculty self-archiving in institutional repositories. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 246-254.
  12. Klein, M., Broadwell, P., Farb, S. E., & Grappone, T. (2016). Comparing published scientific journal articles to their pre-print versions. In N. R. Adam, B. Cassel, & Y. Yesha (Eds.). Proceedings of the 16th ACM/IEEE-CS on Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 153-162). New York: ACM.
  13. Kling, R., Spector, L., & McKim, G. (2002). Locally controlled scholarly publishing via the Internet: The Guild Model. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 39(1), 228-238.
  14. Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Demleitner, M., Henneken, E., & Murray, S. S. (2005). The effect of use and access on citations. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1395-1402.
  15. Kurtz, M. J., & Henneken, E. A. (2007). Open Access does not increase citations for research articles from The Astrophysical Journal. Retrieved November 2, 2018 from
  16. Lariviere, V., Sugimoto, C. R., Macaluso, B., Milojevic, S., Cronin, B., & Thelwall, M. (2014). arXiv E‐prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(6), 1157-1169.
  17. Li, X., Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(6), 614-635.
  18. Lin, J. (2018, May 31). Preprints growth rate ten times higher than journal articles. Retrieved November 2, 2018 from
  19. Manuel, K. (2001). The place of e-prints in the publication patterns of physical scientists. Science & Technology Libraries, 20(1), 59-85.
  20. Moed, H. F. (2007). The effect of "open access" on citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv's condensed matter section. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2047-2054.
  21. Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). Data sources for performing citation analysis: An overview. Journal of Documentation, 64(2), 193-210.
  22. Pinfield, S. (2005). Self-archiving publications. In G. E. Gorman, & F. Rowland (Eds.). International yearbook of library and information management 2004/2005: Scholarly publishing in an electronic era (pp. 118-145). London: Facet Publishing.
  23. Swan, A. (2010). The Open Access citation advantage: Studies and results to date. Southampton: University of Southampton Institutional Repository.
  24. Youngen, G. K. (1998). Citation patterns to traditional and electronic preprints in the published literature. College & Research Libraries, 59(5), 448-456.
  25. Zha, X., Li, J., & Yan, Y. (2013). Understanding preprint sharing on Sciencepaper Online from the perspectives of motivation and trust. Information Development, 29(1), 81-95.


Supported by : Ministerio de Economia, Industria y Competitividad