Three Odd Observations from Working with Publish-Review-Curate (PRC) Communities

As PRC communities evolve, I’ve noticed three intriguing patterns that reveal a lot about how this sector is evolving:

1. The Strategic Use of Language
   Preprint servers carefully avoid terms like “submission” or “publication,” using “deposit” and “distribution” instead to emphasize their role as sharing platforms, not publishers, and to avoid being seen as a threat to journals. Similarly, PRC communities focus on terms like “review” and “curation” to position themselves as complimentary to preprint servers. However, while PRC platforms often host preprints alongside reviews—providing valuable context and frequently offering better display and usability than preprint servers—they avoid framing this as publishing. This careful language ensures they are not perceived as competitors to preprint servers. And so it goes, down the line...
2. Reinventing the Workflow, Yet Echoing the Past
   PRC communities often describe themselves as radically different from traditional journals, yet when I work with these groups to work out their workflow they design workflows that mirror the systems they aim to disrupt. Structured peer review, validation processes, and hierarchies of credibility remain central to their operations. These workflows may be more flexible and community-driven, but they underscore the enduring cultural importance of review and quality control processes in academic publishing. This pattern highlights how PRC communities, while innovative, still rely on foundational elements of the journal model to establish trust and credibility.
3. The Rise of DOIs as Credentials
   In PRC communities, Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) have become the de facto credential for recognizing something as “published.” Where PDFs once signified a document’s legitimacy, DOIs now fulfill this role by embedding metadata and linking outputs to a broader ecosystem. This shift reflects the importance of interoperability and discoverability in the digital age. For PRC platforms, having a DOI attached to a reviewed preprint or curated output signals that the work is not only credible but also part of a connected, global scholarly network. It’s a fascinating evolution that positions metadata as central to the notion of being “published.”

These observations reveal how PRC communities navigate a complex balance of innovation and tradition, language and legitimacy. They are redefining the norms of scholarly communication while still embedded in the systems they seek to disrupt.