scholarly journals The future of arXiv and knowledge discovery in open science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steinn Sigurdsson
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Discovery ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Future

Open Science, Closed Doors? Countering Marginalization through an Agenda for Ethical, Inclusive Research in Communication

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse Fox ◽  
Katy E Pearce ◽  
Adrienne L Massanari ◽  
Julius Matthew Riles ◽  
Łukasz Szulc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Respect For Persons ◽  
Communication Research ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Research Communication ◽  
The Future

Abstract The open science (OS) movement has advocated for increased transparency in certain aspects of research. Communication is taking its first steps toward OS as some journals have adopted OS guidelines codified by another discipline. We find this pursuit troubling as OS prioritizes openness while insufficiently addressing essential ethical principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Some recommended open science practices increase the potential for harm for marginalized participants, communities, and researchers. We elaborate how OS can serve a marginalizing force within academia and the research community, as it overlooks the needs of marginalized scholars and excludes some forms of scholarship. We challenge the current instantiation of OS and propose a divergent agenda for the future of Communication research centered on ethical, inclusive research practices.

Psychophysiology, cognition, and political differences

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan Mansell ◽  
Allison Harell ◽  
Elisabeth Gidengil ◽  
Patrick A. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Common Theme ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Future ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Political Differences ◽  
Science Framework

AbstractWe introduce the Politics and the Life Sciences special issue on Psychophysiology, Cognition, and Political Differences. This issue represents the second special issue funded by the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences that adheres to the Open Science Framework for registered reports (RR). Here pre-analysis plans (PAPs) are peer-reviewed and given in-principle acceptance (IPA) prior to data being collected and/or analyzed, and are published contingent upon the preregistration of the study being followed as proposed. Bound by a common theme of the importance of incorporating psychophysiological perspectives into the study of politics, broadly defined, the articles in this special issue feature a unique set of research questions and methodologies. In the following, we summarize the findings, discuss the innovations produced by this research, and highlight the importance of open science for the future of political science research.

Psychiatric epidemiology: Looking to the future

2020 ◽  
pp. 425-432
Author(s):  
Jayati Das-Munshi ◽  
Tamsin Ford ◽  
Matthew Hotopf ◽  
Martin Prince ◽  
Robert Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Psychiatric Epidemiology ◽  
Biological Data ◽  
Gps Tracking ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Impact

In this final chapter to the second edition of Practical Psychiatric Epidemiology, developments in psychiatric epidemiology since the first edition are summarized and the editors offer a view on where the future may lie. The themes summarized in this chapter include those related to large-scale datasets or ‘big data’, new technologies and science communication (including data generated through GPS tracking systems and the impact of social media), expanding biological data and biobanks, as well as the impact of globalization, migration, and culture on understanding psychiatric epidemiological principles. The last part of this chapter raises the important issue of open science initiatives. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion on the constancy and ongoing evolution of psychiatric epidemiology.

scholarly journals Wiley on Open Science and Plan S

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Wood ◽  
Erik Lieungh
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Publishing Company ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
The Future ◽  
Global Publishing ◽  
A Company

In this episode, we talk to one of the big ones - the global publishing company Wiley. Wiley is a company with over 5000 employees that specializes in academic publishing. Our guest is Alice Wood, senior publishing development editor at Wiley. We want to know what their take on Open Science and Plan S is? What happens when you "flip" a journal? And how they see Open Science and Open Access as part of their company in the future. Wood also elaborates on what they are currently doing when it comes to making their own journals OA, what journals they choose to flip and if they do any changes to those journals after flipping. The host of this episode is Erik Lieungh. This episode was first published 10 January 2019.

scholarly journals Yes! We’re open. Open science and the future of academic practices in translation and interpreting studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Olalla-Soler
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Future ◽  
Academic Practices ◽  
Core Features ◽  
Publishing Practices

This article offers an overview of open science and open-science practices and their applications to translation and interpreting studies (TIS). Publications on open science in different disciplines were reviewed in order to define open science, identify academic publishing practices emerging from the core features of open science, and discuss the limitations of such practices in the humanities and the social sciences. The compiled information was then contextualised within TIS academic publishing practices based on bibliographic and bibliometric data. The results helped to identify what open-science practices have been adopted in TIS, what problems emerge from applying some of these practices, and in what ways such practices could be fostered in our discipline. This article aims to foster a debate on the future of TIS publishing and the role that open science will play in the discipline in the upcoming years.

scholarly journals Open science and the future university researcher

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Evan Niemeyer
Keyword(s):  
Research Agenda ◽  
Open Science ◽  
White Paper ◽  
The Future ◽  
University Researcher ◽  
Institu Tions ◽  
University Leaders

This white paper was written as a contribution to the “Imagining Tomorrow’s University: Rethinking scholarship, education, and institu- tions for an open, networked era” workshop, a joint NIH/NSF-funded event held 8–9 March 2017 in Rosemont, IL. In this paper, I present an overview of what I consider open science, its importance, and how it plays a role in my research agenda. I also discuss challenges faced in pursuing research openness, and recommend changes to university leaders to address these barriers.

scholarly journals Open Scientific Practices are the Way Forward for Internet Gaming Disorder Research: A Response to Yao et al

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew K Przybylski ◽  
Netta Weinstein ◽  
Kou Murayama
Keyword(s):  
Internet Gaming Disorder ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Gaming Addiction ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Gaming Disorder ◽  
Science Practice ◽  
Internet Gaming ◽  
Internet Gaming Addiction ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Way

In this editorial we advance the idea that the future of Internet Gaming Addiction research must be guided by open science practice.

scholarly journals The Future of Sociology Depends on Open Science

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nate Breznau
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
The Future ◽  
Current Practices

Reliability, transparency and ethical crises pushed psychology to reorganize as a discipline over the last decade. Political science also shows signs of reworking itself in response to these crises. Sociology sits on the sidelines. There have not been the same reliability or ethical scandals, at least not in the limelight, nor has there been strong disciplinary moves toward open science. This paper therefore investigates sociology as a discipline looking at current practices, definitions of sociology, positions of sociological associations and a brief consideration of the arguments of three highly influential sociologists: Weber, Merton and Habermas. Based on this disciplinary review, I suggest that sociology is no different from its neighboring disciplines in terms of reliability or ethical dilemmas. Therefore, sociology should adopt open science practices immediately. Weber, Merton and Habermas – three very different social thinkers epistemologically – offer strong arguments that favor what we know as “open science” today. Open science promotes ethics and reliability, reduces fraud and ultimately increases the value of sociology for policymakers and the public. The paper concludes with some basic steps individual researchers can take to move sociology toward open science.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document