Researchers preparing NIW petitions often have work in various stages of publication. Preprints on arXiv or bioRxiv, manuscripts under review, and papers in revision occupy a gray zone between completed and pending work. This blog explains when to include unpublished work in NIW petitions and how to present it effectively.
Yes, you can include preprints and under-review papers in NIW petitions, but their evidentiary value differs from peer-reviewed publications. Preprints on recognized servers demonstrate ongoing research productivity and can show citations, downloads, or community engagement. Under-review papers show active work but carry less weight than accepted publications. Present unpublished work clearly labeled with its status, and do not overweight it relative to published work. Preprints are increasingly accepted in many fields and can meaningfully contribute to your petition, particularly when they have generated citations or attention. However, the strongest NIW petitions rely primarily on peer-reviewed publications while using preprints as supplementary evidence of ongoing contributions.
Preprints and under-review papers can be included but should be clearly labeled.
USCIS does not prohibit unpublished work as evidence.
Preprints with citations or downloads demonstrate community engagement.
Under-review papers show active research but lack peer validation.
Published peer-reviewed work carries more weight than unpublished work.
Field norms matter: preprints are more standard in physics than in medicine.
Present unpublished work as supplementary evidence, not primary support.
Preprints and under-review papers can be included but should be clearly labeled.
USCIS does not prohibit unpublished work as evidence.
Preprints with citations or downloads demonstrate community engagement.
Under-review papers show active research but lack peer validation.
Published peer-reviewed work carries more weight than unpublished work.
Field norms matter: preprints are more standard in physics than in medicine.
Present unpublished work as supplementary evidence, not primary support.
Preprints posted on recognized servers like arXiv, bioRxiv, or SSRN demonstrate your research contributions before formal publication. They show you are actively producing scholarly work in your field.
Preprints can accumulate citations, downloads, and attention metrics that demonstrate community interest. If your preprint has been cited by other researchers, those citations provide objective evidence of impact similar to citations of published work.
The key distinction is that preprints have not undergone peer review. They represent your work and your field's interest in it, but they lack the validation that peer review provides. This affects their weight relative to peer-reviewed publications.
Preprints are most valuable when they have demonstrated impact through citations, downloads, media coverage, or adoption by other researchers. A preprint with 50 citations provides meaningful evidence even without formal publication.
In fields where preprinting is standard practice, like physics, mathematics, and increasingly computer science and biology, preprints carry more weight because they represent normal scholarly communication.
Recent preprints showing ongoing productivity complement older publications. If your most recent published paper is two years old but you have active preprints, they demonstrate continued research engagement.
Clearly label preprints as preprints. Do not conflate them with peer-reviewed publications or present them ambiguously. Transparency about publication status builds credibility.
Include preprint server information, posting date, and any available metrics like downloads, views, or citations. These metrics demonstrate engagement even without formal publication.
If a preprint has subsequently been accepted for publication, update your petition materials to reflect that status. A preprint that became a published paper should be presented as the published version with note of the preprint's prior posting.
Use standard citation format with clear preprint server identification. For example: "Author Name. Title. arXiv preprint arXiv:2024.12345 (2024)." This format makes the preprint status immediately clear.
If the preprint has a DOI, include it. Many preprint servers assign DOIs that provide permanent identification and citation tracking.
Group preprints separately from peer-reviewed publications in your evidence list. Mixing them together creates confusion about your publication record.
Papers currently under review at peer-reviewed journals represent work in progress. They show active research but have not yet received peer validation.
Under-review papers carry less evidentiary weight than either published papers or preprints with demonstrated impact. They represent claims about your work that have not been externally validated.
You may mention under-review papers to show ongoing research activity, but do not rely on them as primary evidence. The paper might be rejected, and even if accepted, it is not yet a validated contribution.
If including under-review papers, provide the manuscript title, target journal, submission date, and current status. A submission confirmation email or acknowledgment letter from the journal documents the submission.
Be honest about the status. "Under review" means actively being evaluated. "Submitted" means sent to the journal. "In revision" means you received reviewer feedback and are revising. Each status has different implications.
Update your petition if the paper's status changes. Acceptance strengthens your case. Rejection means you should probably remove the paper from your evidence unless you are resubmitting elsewhere.
Different academic fields have different relationships with preprints. Understanding your field's norms helps you present preprints appropriately.
In physics and mathematics, preprints on arXiv are standard and well-respected. The community routinely cites preprints, and they function as legitimate scholarly communication. Preprints in these fields carry substantial weight.
In medicine and biology, preprints are increasingly common but still secondary to peer-reviewed publication. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated preprint acceptance in these fields, but peer review remains the gold standard.
In fields where preprints are uncommon, posting one may not demonstrate what it would in preprint-heavy fields. The community engagement and citation patterns that validate preprints may not exist.
Consider whether a preprint in your field helps your case. If it has attracted attention and citations despite preprint being unusual, that demonstrates notable impact. If it has been ignored, it adds little.
Focus your evidence on the publication channels your field values. Peer-reviewed journal publications, conference proceedings, or other field-standard outputs may be more appropriate evidence.
Citations to preprints demonstrate that other researchers found your work useful before or instead of the published version. These citations have real evidentiary value.
Google Scholar and other citation databases track preprint citations. You can document citations to preprints the same way you document citations to published work.
Some citations to preprints convert to citations of the published version once publication occurs. Others remain as preprint citations. Both demonstrate that researchers engaged with your work.
Preprint citations show impact but do not fully substitute for citations to peer-reviewed work. The publication process adds validation that preprints lack.
A paper with 100 citations to the published version demonstrates more validated impact than a preprint with 100 citations. However, a preprint with 100 citations demonstrates more impact than a published paper with 5 citations.
Use preprint citations as evidence of impact, but present them in context. Acknowledge their value while recognizing the difference from peer-reviewed publication citations.
This is a strategic question without one right answer. Waiting for publication strengthens your evidence but delays your green card process.
If you have sufficient published work already, filing now with preprints as supplementary evidence may be appropriate. The preprints add to an already strong publication record.
If your published record is thin and you have promising papers under review, waiting for publication may produce a stronger petition. Balance immigration timing against evidence strength.
You can submit additional evidence to USCIS after filing if your case is still pending. Publication of papers that were preprints or under review at filing time strengthens your case.
Include a cover letter explaining the update and providing the new publication information. The evidence should be submitted before a decision is made.
Do not rely on this option as your primary strategy. File with the strongest evidence you have, treating subsequent publications as helpful supplements rather than essential additions.
Preprints posted on recognized servers like arXiv, bioRxiv, or SSRN demonstrate your research contributions before formal publication. They show you are actively producing scholarly work in your field.
Preprints can accumulate citations, downloads, and attention metrics that demonstrate community interest. If your preprint has been cited by other researchers, those citations provide objective evidence of impact similar to citations of published work.
The key distinction is that preprints have not undergone peer review. They represent your work and your field's interest in it, but they lack the validation that peer review provides. This affects their weight relative to peer-reviewed publications.
Preprints are most valuable when they have demonstrated impact through citations, downloads, media coverage, or adoption by other researchers. A preprint with 50 citations provides meaningful evidence even without formal publication.
In fields where preprinting is standard practice, like physics, mathematics, and increasingly computer science and biology, preprints carry more weight because they represent normal scholarly communication.
Recent preprints showing ongoing productivity complement older publications. If your most recent published paper is two years old but you have active preprints, they demonstrate continued research engagement.
Clearly label preprints as preprints. Do not conflate them with peer-reviewed publications or present them ambiguously. Transparency about publication status builds credibility.
Include preprint server information, posting date, and any available metrics like downloads, views, or citations. These metrics demonstrate engagement even without formal publication.
If a preprint has subsequently been accepted for publication, update your petition materials to reflect that status. A preprint that became a published paper should be presented as the published version with note of the preprint's prior posting.
Use standard citation format with clear preprint server identification. For example: "Author Name. Title. arXiv preprint arXiv:2024.12345 (2024)." This format makes the preprint status immediately clear.
If the preprint has a DOI, include it. Many preprint servers assign DOIs that provide permanent identification and citation tracking.
Group preprints separately from peer-reviewed publications in your evidence list. Mixing them together creates confusion about your publication record.
Papers currently under review at peer-reviewed journals represent work in progress. They show active research but have not yet received peer validation.
Under-review papers carry less evidentiary weight than either published papers or preprints with demonstrated impact. They represent claims about your work that have not been externally validated.
You may mention under-review papers to show ongoing research activity, but do not rely on them as primary evidence. The paper might be rejected, and even if accepted, it is not yet a validated contribution.
If including under-review papers, provide the manuscript title, target journal, submission date, and current status. A submission confirmation email or acknowledgment letter from the journal documents the submission.
Be honest about the status. "Under review" means actively being evaluated. "Submitted" means sent to the journal. "In revision" means you received reviewer feedback and are revising. Each status has different implications.
Update your petition if the paper's status changes. Acceptance strengthens your case. Rejection means you should probably remove the paper from your evidence unless you are resubmitting elsewhere.
Different academic fields have different relationships with preprints. Understanding your field's norms helps you present preprints appropriately.
In physics and mathematics, preprints on arXiv are standard and well-respected. The community routinely cites preprints, and they function as legitimate scholarly communication. Preprints in these fields carry substantial weight.
In medicine and biology, preprints are increasingly common but still secondary to peer-reviewed publication. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated preprint acceptance in these fields, but peer review remains the gold standard.
In fields where preprints are uncommon, posting one may not demonstrate what it would in preprint-heavy fields. The community engagement and citation patterns that validate preprints may not exist.
Consider whether a preprint in your field helps your case. If it has attracted attention and citations despite preprint being unusual, that demonstrates notable impact. If it has been ignored, it adds little.
Focus your evidence on the publication channels your field values. Peer-reviewed journal publications, conference proceedings, or other field-standard outputs may be more appropriate evidence.
Citations to preprints demonstrate that other researchers found your work useful before or instead of the published version. These citations have real evidentiary value.
Google Scholar and other citation databases track preprint citations. You can document citations to preprints the same way you document citations to published work.
Some citations to preprints convert to citations of the published version once publication occurs. Others remain as preprint citations. Both demonstrate that researchers engaged with your work.
Preprint citations show impact but do not fully substitute for citations to peer-reviewed work. The publication process adds validation that preprints lack.
A paper with 100 citations to the published version demonstrates more validated impact than a preprint with 100 citations. However, a preprint with 100 citations demonstrates more impact than a published paper with 5 citations.
Use preprint citations as evidence of impact, but present them in context. Acknowledge their value while recognizing the difference from peer-reviewed publication citations.
This is a strategic question without one right answer. Waiting for publication strengthens your evidence but delays your green card process.
If you have sufficient published work already, filing now with preprints as supplementary evidence may be appropriate. The preprints add to an already strong publication record.
If your published record is thin and you have promising papers under review, waiting for publication may produce a stronger petition. Balance immigration timing against evidence strength.
You can submit additional evidence to USCIS after filing if your case is still pending. Publication of papers that were preprints or under review at filing time strengthens your case.
Include a cover letter explaining the update and providing the new publication information. The evidence should be submitted before a decision is made.
Do not rely on this option as your primary strategy. File with the strongest evidence you have, treating subsequent publications as helpful supplements rather than essential additions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should I post preprints specifically to strengthen my NIW?
Posting preprints for legitimate scholarly communication makes sense. Posting them solely for immigration purposes may not help much if they do not attract engagement.
Should I post preprints specifically to strengthen my NIW?
Posting preprints for legitimate scholarly communication makes sense. Posting them solely for immigration purposes may not help much if they do not attract engagement.
What if my employer discourages preprinting?
Some employers have preprint policies. Respect your employment obligations while explaining the situation in your petition if relevant. Focus on evidence you can legitimately present.
What if my employer discourages preprinting?
Some employers have preprint policies. Respect your employment obligations while explaining the situation in your petition if relevant. Focus on evidence you can legitimately present.
Do preprints on personal websites count?
Preprints on personal websites lack the validation and discoverability of recognized preprint servers. Posting on arXiv, bioRxiv, or similar platforms is preferable.
Do preprints on personal websites count?
Preprints on personal websites lack the validation and discoverability of recognized preprint servers. Posting on arXiv, bioRxiv, or similar platforms is preferable.
Can I include rejected papers?
No. Rejected papers should not be included as evidence. If you believe the work has value, revise and resubmit to another venue. A rejection indicates the work did not meet peer review standards.
Can I include rejected papers?
No. Rejected papers should not be included as evidence. If you believe the work has value, revise and resubmit to another venue. A rejection indicates the work did not meet peer review standards.
Table of Contents
Quick Resources
