I am curious to know if articles posted on academia.edu can be regarded as scholarly publications? In other words, can someone list them in his/her publication list or resume? This question may be expanded to foster a discussion of what constitutes a scholarly publication in the online literature era.

  • 1
    I am quite positive that publication means it has been peer-reviewed, so having it only on academia.edu is not enough for it to qualify as publication. – Marko Karbevski Feb 22 '17 at 8:44
  • 1
    @MarkoKarbevski What field are you in? In math, listing preprints under publications is pretty common (though they are usually clearly marked as such, and would almost never be published on a site like academia.edu). – Tobias Kildetoft Feb 22 '17 at 9:04
  • @TobiasKildetoft I am aware of that but I was not talking about pre-publications. – Marko Karbevski Feb 22 '17 at 9:52

It does not matter where it is published, it matters (as someone already commented) whether it went through the peer review process.

There are number of outlets to "publish" your work without peer review, the one I am most familiar with is arXiv. The distinction matters, because:

  1. The research that has not been peer-reviewed may be of poor quality, biased, not up to scientific standards, or simply fake. Note "may be". Scientific conferences and especially scientific journals are assumed to do peer review before accepting the paper.
  2. The review process is time consuming for the reviewers, so scientific community tries to prevent "double submissions" or even double publication. The "publications" with no peer review are not considered scientific publications in strict sense, therefore they are not counted towards "double submission" criteria (at least for the conferences I know).

So the answer is, yes, you can put it in your CV, but the reader may view it differently than you, e.g. the impression may be that you are unable to publish peer-reviewed paper, and resorting to this instead.

Now, specifically to Academia.edu, due to their model as "review along the publication, not before it" makes the point moot. But nevertheless, since you CAN publish stuff on Academia.edu without prior review, no one can be sure whether the work is of high quality or junk just by the fact that you managed to publish it. Granted, sometimes junk research gets through the peer review process as well, but there is reasonable assumption that the research is good, if peer-reviewed at a decent conference or published in a decent journal, while with Academia.edu it is fair to say it is probably exactly the reverse situation: one has to assume it is junk, unless proven otherwise by going to the site and reading the comments (if any).


Although I have read some of the papers,those of interest to my field of research I have found to be riddled with errors and assumptions. Does not incorporate any form of peer review.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.