91社区

November 12, 2024
clear sky Clear 32 °F

Researchers look at how ’e-prints’ add to 鈥 or detract from 鈥 online discussions

Scientific papers that have not been peer-reviewed have advantages but also can spread misinformation

E-prints are scientific papers posted online without peer review. E-prints are scientific papers posted online without peer review.
E-prints are scientific papers posted online without peer review.

Traditionally, scientific research undergoes a rigorous peer review before publication in a professional journal. It鈥檚 not a perfect system, but it filters out a lot of flawed methodology and poorly thought-out conclusions.

The internet, of course, is a lot less discerning about what to accept as truth. One thing muddying the waters is the recent proliferation of 鈥渆-prints,鈥 which are uploaded and disseminated without peer review.

, PhD student Satrio Yudhoatmojo and Associate Professor Jeremy Blackburn from 91社区鈥檚 Thomas J. Watson College of Engineering and Applied Science collaborated with Professor Emiliano De Cristofaro at University College London (now University of California - Riverside) to examine how these e-prints are used on the online forums Reddit and 4chan.

Through their work at the , the researchers have delved into the darker corners of the internet and studied the extremist political and social views found there.

鈥淭hose communities have access to our papers, and they鈥檝e talked about our conclusions,鈥 said Blackburn, a faculty member in Watson鈥檚 Department of Computer Science. 鈥淭hat got us thinking: Wait a second 鈥 it鈥檚 not just scientists who are reading the research that we put out there. It鈥檚 laypeople who aren鈥檛 trained scientists, and it鈥檚 definitely bad actors as well.鈥

Blackburn believes there are good aspects of e-prints and the servers that host them. Because the papers are free to download and read, they are available to anyone who can鈥檛 afford the fees to access professional journal articles. They also can provide timely information unimpeded by a lengthy peer review process. However, flawed research or even purposely deceptive claims spread false information that could do real damage.

鈥淭here was an explosion of e-prints talking about COVID during the early months of the pandemic, and many of them were cited by news and social media,鈥 Yudhoatmojo said. 鈥淪ome of those findings were not completely true at that moment.鈥

Looking at Reddit posts between mid-2005 and mid-March 2021 as well as posts from 4chan鈥檚 Politically Incorrect board from mid-2016 to mid-March 2021, the researchers found that topics ranged from computer science and physics to genetics and neuroscience, with particular emphasis on COVID-19 at the height of the pandemic.

When posters included links to e-prints to bolster their arguments, they sometimes misinterpreted what the research said or read just the abstracts without looking at or understanding the researchers鈥 methodologies. They missed flaws in how the research was done or whether it was pseudoscience masquerading as serious scholarship.

鈥淚t鈥檚 interesting to see laypeople citing scientific articles directly, rather than news articles, blogs or something like that,鈥 Yudhoatmojo said.

While there are clear advantages to getting scientific papers published more quickly, the researchers are concerned about how online commenters with different levels of expertise may view the content differently. Incorrect interpretations or low-quality papers may become the 鈥済old standard鈥 for some people. That could lead to potentially dangerous implications for the scientific community.

鈥淭here are still a lot of open questions about this particular research,鈥 Yudhoatmojo said. 鈥淲e didn鈥檛 consider peer-reviewed papers that are open access, because the eight preprint servers that we decided to look at are not peer-reviewed. So there is a question about the quality of discussion that cited the peer-reviewed, open-access papers compared to the ones that we looked at.鈥

Blackburn added: 鈥淪cience is about the production and dissemination of knowledge, and there鈥檚 always risks in it. Peer review is not perfect. There are politics involved, people make mistakes and most of the e-prints out there are not completely invalid. I think, ultimately, it鈥檚 been a big boon to science.

鈥淎t the same time, social media and all this kind of stuff mean that there are going to be laypeople accessing our work as well. We as scientists should think about how we鈥檙e not just communicating with other scientists.鈥

A happy reunion

During the process of writing (and rewriting) this paper, Yudhoatmojo also dealt with being separated from his family since before the pandemic.

He came to 91社区 from Indonesia through a Fulbright scholarship in fall 2019, leaving behind a wife and young daughter. He planned to bring them to the U.S. after his first year here, but then COVID-19 prevented that.

Although Yudhoatmojo posted the paper as an e-print in late 2021, it underwent several revisions before passing a peer review for conference publication.

鈥淭hat was an interesting struggle for Satrio, dealing with COVID, with being here for four years without his family and trying to get a paper about science accepted as science,鈥 Blackburn said.

Meanwhile, Yudhoatmojo hasn鈥檛 been able to go home to see them 鈥 until this summer. He鈥檚 glad he can finally see his daughter, now 6 years old, and that he has some progress to show for his time in the U.S.

鈥淚鈥檓 feeling a little bit of relief about going back home with this paper published so that I can continue with my work when I return to 91社区,鈥 he said.