Abstract:

[Purpose/Significance] The rapid advancement of digital infrastructure has precipitated a fundamental transformation in scholarly communication, characterized by an increasing reliance on online platforms. Preprint exchange, as a cornerstone of open science, offers researchers opportunities for immediate dissemination and collaborative engagement. However, the absence of rigorous peer review raises persistent concerns regarding research ethics, data integrity, and the reliability of scholarly outputs, which can undermine public confidence in preprint platforms. Addressing these challenges is essential not only for maintaining the integrity of academic discourse but also for fostering a transparent and trustworthy open science ecosystem. This research contributes to the existing scholarship by systematically examining the trust framework of preprint platforms, positioning itself at the intersection of library and information science and scholarly communication studies. In contrast to previous investigations that have focused predominantly on dissemination efficiency or platform functionality, this study emphasizes the structural dimensions of trustworthiness. It presents an innovative analytical framework that strengthens the theoretical foundations of academic information trust and provides practical strategies for enhancing the governance and legitimacy of preprint platforms. [Method/Process] To ensure both theoretical rigor and empirical depth, first, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify potential trust-related vulnerabilities in preprint platforms and to systematically delineate their credibility challenges. This review identified five critical factors influencing the credibility of preprint platforms: academic conflicts of interest, platform reliability, heterogeneous manuscript quality, information overload, and insufficient academic recognition. Drawing upon the DeLone & McLean (D&M) Information Systems Success Model and aligning with the ISO 16363 standard for trustworthy digital repositories, the study analyzed the structural components of trustworthiness through the dimensions of system quality, information quality, and service quality. Subsequently, in-depth case studies of prominent platforms, including arXiv and ChinaXiv, were undertaken to examine their governance architectures, operational methodologies, and practical implementations. This process culminated in evidence-based recommendations for enhancing platform trustworthiness. This integrated methodological framework not only synthesizes theoretical insights with empirical evidence but also ensures the scientific rigor, reliability, and practical applicability of the proposed trust model. [Results/Conclusions] Based on these findings, a three-dimensional trust framework was developed, encompassing system trustworthiness, information trustworthiness, and service trustworthiness. This framework transcends traditional quality control paradigms and offers novel perspectives for the standardized development of preprint platforms. The research further articulates pathways for establishing trustworthiness across three levels: 1) system trustworthiness, adhering to FAIR principles and implementing long-term preservation strategies to provide a stable institutional foundation; 2) information trustworthiness, establishing a comprehensive quality governance continuum that incorporates "pre-screening, dynamic identification, and post-peer review" mechanisms; and 3) service trustworthiness, delivering professional preprint services through collaborative governance models and journal coordination frameworks.While this framework provides a comprehensive analytical perspective, certain limitations should be acknowledged. This study's primary reliance on qualitative methods necessitates broader empirical validation. Furthermore, its focus was on platform functionalities rather than user perceptions. Consequently, future research can adopt a mixed-methods approach, incorporate user perception theories, and establish quantitative metrics for evaluating platform trustworthiness.

Key words: trustworthy preprint platforms, trustworthiness, D&M information system success model, open science, scholarly communication