Academia Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for academics and those enrolled in higher education. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
As simple question as this: does a preprint have a better chance of being published after peer-review, than a journal article that is not or was not a preprint?
Note that the manuscript was submitted to a call for journal ... and is temporary a preprint
An journal editor once told me about an experiment they did where for every article submitted to their journal during a particular period they tracked if and when the manuscript appeared as a preprint on the arXiv, and what the final fate of those submissions were. In their data they did find manuscripts that appeared on the arxiv before or during peer-review were more likely to be accepted by their journal.
Of course, correlation does not imply causation, i.e. it is not necessarily true that the simple act of making a preprint available raises the likelihood a particular manuscript gets accepted. More likely this is a selection effect, if authors are confident in their work they are more likely to make it public available as a preprint.
Just about the only effect I can think of making the paper available as a preprint is whether or not reviewers agree to review it. That's because some journals will not show the manuscript to reviewers before they agree to review; they only show the abstract (this is to safeguard the confidentiality of the peer review process). In turn this means if the reviewer might search for a preprint before agreeing to review the paper. Which should have no impact on whether the paper is ultimately accepted.
So: no.
