The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting
Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)
Job-Market Discussion Thread (2025-26)

recent posts

about

Publishing preprints after journal acceptance?

In our August "how can we help you?" thread, Mercado writes:

A journal recently accepted a manuscript of mine. That is, it is forthcoming in journal x. Is it bad form to post a version of the paper on my professional website before the journal publishes the manuscript?

A reader then replied:

Mercado I think it is bad form. Read the contract you signed with the publisher, and then honor it.

This strikes me as a strange reply. It is of course vital to respect the terms of a publishing contract. However, my sense is that most (though not all) journals allow preprints to be posted on an author's website and/or repository upon acceptance.


As you can see on my webpage, I have links to all of my papers on PhilPapers, and I have deposited preprints of nearly all of my papers there, usually immediately upon journal acceptance (though sometimes after publisher-mandated embargoes). One of the great things about PhilPapers is that when you go to upload a paper, it has a function that enables you to double-check the archiving policy of the journal your paper is coming out in. Usually, journals require that you upload either an accepted version of the paper (prior to typesetting), or alternatively, a version of the paper prior to peer-review–so you should definitely know which (if either) is okay with the journal in question. However, aside from being careful in these ways, I don't see anything at all problematic about the practice. On the contrary, as long as the journal permits it, it seems to me like it's in both the author's and the journal's interest to post preprints. The more a paper gets read, cited, and engaged with, the better!

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours? 

Posted in ,

6 responses to “Publishing preprints after journal acceptance?”

  1. R

    I agree with Marcus that, so long as it is permitted by the publishing contract, it is good form to post the pre-print on the OP’s webpage. For those of us who aren’t employed by a university, it is often difficult to get access to a paper when a pre-print is not posted because journal subscriptions are so expensive. If you’re not sure if you can post your pre-print, you can use Sherpa Romeo (https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/) to check (though it is only a guide-the most definitive source is your publishing contract). Just don’t upload the typeset copy of your paper, as that is usually not allowed!

    Reply
  2. Paul Carron

    Yep, look at the guidelines, ask a journal rep if necessary, and then post the closet to final version allowed.

    Reply
  3. Postdoc

    I mean what’s the worst that’s going to happen to you if the publisher finds out you’ve broke some rule? I would think it would be to ask you to take it down. They’re unlikely to sue you over posting a preprint online.

    Reply
  4. postdoc

    Almost all journals will allow you to post your manuscript without journal typesetting to your personal website. You can mark it as the accepted version, or the penultimate version.
    However, putting into an official online repository, sometimes called self-archiving or Green Open Access, usually has an embargo period. This depends from journal to journal (publisher to publisher). In philosophy, this embargo period can last anywhere from 12-36 months. You should look at the publisher’s website. They will specify what can be made available when. For example, you can refer to the details here: https://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/cambridge-open-access/green-open-access-policy
    Under almost all academic publishing agreements, you have the copyright to your own words, so you can make public the version of the paper that has been accepted on your own personal website. Things get tricky if it is an official online repository and such.
    FWIW, I think it is a good thing to put on the final author version of your paper to your own website!

    Reply
  5. author

    I would like to address something Postdoc said (not to be confused with what postdoc said).
    Numerous people in the professional have a very cavalier attitude toward academic publishers. They want the prestige and what-have you associated with good journals and good presses (they DO send their papers to them), but they do not want to pay the price. Of course, you can do whatever is legal (and illegal, insofar as you can get away with it). But it costs money to run proper journals, and academic presses.
    I say this as an author who has been told more than once by someone that they have an illegal download of my book. Thanks for reading it. Of course I love an audience. But I would have liked the $5 or so I am entitled to. Further, I honestly believe that there is value-added by good publishers, and they should not be robbed of what is theirs. (I know … I sound like Jesus, asked about whether we should pay our taxes to the Romans … incidentally, I also willing pay my taxes).

    Reply
  6. Mike

    I know people are trying to be careful and mentioning the complexities involved in self-archiving, but I still feel like the discussion here is glossing over a lot of the limitations. If someone casually read the above discussion, and didn’t pay attention to the detail, you might walk away thinking you pretty can always post the final, pre-typeset version of your paper wherever you want. For example, postdoc says “Under almost all academic publishing agreements, you have the copyright to your own words, so you can make public the version of the paper that has been accepted on your own personal website.”
    This is not my experience, and I pay close attention to my contracts. For example, Wiley journals (which include many of the discipline’s journals) have a 24-month embargo before you can post the accepted version to your personal website. (I haven’t published in all of these journals, but the ones I have published all in have the exact same contract, so I assume it’s standard for Wiley.) Wiley requires you to wait 24 months before you can post the accepted version (the final, pre-typeset manuscript) anywhere, including your website or nonprofit public repositories.
    So, I think the lesson is that if your paper isn’t open-access, there are likely a few layers of conditions on making the final, pre-typeset manuscript available, conditions which nontrivially complicate posting it anywhere. Anyway, I’m just trying to push back against brushing off journal contracts under some loose heuristic of “oh, you can do whatever you want with the pre-typeset version”.
    It does seem to be true that you can do whatever you want with the original submission (the first draft, without any changes in response to referees). But, I wouldn’t want to post that draft anywhere. Usually my changes at the R&R stage are substantial, and it seems to threaten the integrity of the publication to have that draft floating around. For example, someone might read it thinking that it’s pretty much identical to the published version. They might even cite you as thinking P, when the published version no longer makes claim P.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to MikeCancel reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading