As the scholarly communication community is quickly moving towards more diverse and transparent modes of working, there is an increasing need for reliable information on different platforms’ policies. To address this need, we present the outcomes of the Journal Observatory project. This project aims to connect information from a scattered landscape of resources, thereby building toward systematic high-quality information on scholarly communication platforms.

The pandemic has underlined the significance of open science and spurred further growth of preprinting. Nevertheless, preprinting has been adopted at varying rates across different countries/regions. To investigate researchers’ experience with and attitudes toward preprinting, we conducted a survey of authors of research papers published in 2021 or 2022. We find that respondents in the US and Europe had a higher level of familiarity with and adoption of preprinting than those in China and the rest of the world. Respondents in China were most worried about the lack of recognition for preprinting and the risk of getting scooped. US respondents were very concerned about premature media coverage of preprints, the reliability and credibility of preprints, and public sharing of information before peer review. Respondents identified integration of preprinting in journal submission processes as the most important way to promote preprinting.

We analyse the dynamics between national science policymakers and international research evaluation experts in the context of research assessment in Lithuania. We focus on the pressure to comply with international standards of excellence brought in by foreign experts and the attempt of national policymakers to translate the recommendations of these experts to the Lithuanian context. Analysis of national research assessment policies and interviews with politicians and civil servants reveal why Lithuanian policymakers predominantly opted for quantitative measures to assess institutions and researchers.