# To ArXiv or not to ArXiv: A Study Quantifying Pros and Cons of Posting Preprints Online

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.17259 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.17259/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 31 Mar 2022.

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.06563/) (2024)
- [How do Authors' Perceptions of their Papers Compare with Co-authors' Perceptions and Peer-review Decisions?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12966/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Double-blind conferences have engaged in debates over whether to allow authors to post their papers online on arXiv or elsewhere during the review process. Independently, some authors of research papers face the dilemma of whether to put their papers on arXiv due to its pros and cons. We conduct a study to substantiate this debate and dilemma via quantitative measurements. Specifically, we conducted surveys of reviewers in two top-tier double-blind computer science conferences -- ICML 2021 (5361 submissions and 4699 reviewers) and EC 2021 (498 submissions and 190 reviewers). Our three main findings are as follows. First, more than a third of the reviewers self-report searching online for a paper they are assigned to review. Second, conference policies restricting authors from publicising their work on social media or posting preprints before the review process may have only limited effectiveness in maintaining anonymity. Third, outside the review process, we find that preprints from better-ranked institutions experience a very small increase in visibility compared to preprints from other institutions.