scholarly journals Open Science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher P G Allen ◽  
David Marc Anton Mehler
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Incentive Structure ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Early Adoption

The movement towards open science is an unavoidable consequence of seemingly pervasive failures to replicate previous research. This transition comes with great benefits but also significant challenges that are likely to afflict those who carry out the research, usually Early Career Researchers (ECRs). Here, we describe key benefits including reputational gains, increased chances of publication and a broader increase in the reliability of research. These are balanced by challenges that we have encountered, and which involve increased costs in terms of flexibility, time and issues with the current incentive structure, all of which seem to affect ECRs acutely. Although there are major obstacles to the early adoption of open science, overall open science practices should benefit both the ECR and improve the quality and plausibility of research. We review three benefits, three challenges and provide suggestions from the perspective of ECRs for moving towards open science practices.

scholarly journals Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

2021 ◽  
pp. 036168432110292
Author(s):  
Madeleine Pownall ◽  
Catherine V. Talbot ◽  
Anna Henschel ◽  
Alexandra Lautarescu ◽  
Kelly E. Lloyd ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Grass Roots ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Career Research ◽  
Science Movement

Open science aims to improve the rigor, robustness, and reproducibility of psychological research. Despite resistance from some academics, the open science movement has been championed by some early career researchers (ECRs), who have proposed innovative new tools and methods to promote and employ open research principles. Feminist ECRs have much to contribute to this emerging way of doing research. However, they face unique barriers, which may prohibit their full engagement with the open science movement. We, 10 feminist ECRs in psychology from a diverse range of academic and personal backgrounds, explore open science through a feminist lens to consider how voice and power may be negotiated in unique ways for ECRs. Taking a critical and intersectional approach, we discuss how feminist early career research may be complemented or challenged by shifts towards open science. We also propose how ECRs can act as grass-roots changemakers within the context of academic precarity. We identify ways in which open science can benefit from feminist epistemology and end with envisaging a future for feminist ECRs who wish to engage with open science practices in their own research.

scholarly journals Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeleine Pownall ◽  
Catherine V. Talbot ◽  
Anna Henschel ◽  
Alexandra Lautarescu ◽  
Kelly Lloyd ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Career Research ◽  
Science Movement ◽  
Practical Recommendations

Open Science aims to improve the rigour, robustness, and reproducibility of psychological research. Despite resistance from some academics, the Open Science movement has been championed by some Early Career Researchers (ECRs), who have proposed innovative new tools and methods to promote and employ open research principles. Feminist ECRs have much to contribute to this emerging way of doing research. However, they face unique barriers, which may prohibit their full engagement with the Open Science movement. We, ten feminist ECRs in psychology, from a diverse range of academic and personal backgrounds, explore Open Science through a feminist lens, to consider how voice and power may be negotiated in unique ways for ECRs. Taking a critical and intersectional approach, we discuss how feminist early career research may be complemented or challenged by shifts towards Open Science. We also propose how ECRs can act as grassroots changemakers within the context of academic precarity. We identify ways in which Open Science can benefit from feminist epistemology and end with six practical recommendations for feminist ECRs who wish to engage with Open Science practices in their own research.

scholarly journals investigadores junior españoles y su implicación en la ciencia abierta

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo ◽  
David Nicholas
Keyword(s):  
Critical Factor ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Attitudes And Practices ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Precarious Situation

El objetivo es indagar en las actitudes y prácticas de los jóvenes investigadores españoles hacia la ciencia abierta. Se analiza su interés por compartir en abierto publicaciones y datos, por colaborar con otros investigadores y stakeholders, por difundir su investigación y por perseguir el impacto de los resultados científicos. La metodología se fundamenta en entrevistas y encuestas dirigidas a Early Career Researchers (ECRs) españoles. Los resultados muestran el interés de los investigadores noveles por la ciencia abierta, pero también la necesidad de reconocimiento de las acciones implicadas en ella como requisito para su consolidación entre investigadores en situación precaria. La financiación es también un factor crítico a considerar. The aim is to investigate the attitudes and practices of Spanish Early Career Researchers (ECRs) towards open science. Their interest in sharing openly publications and data, in collaborating with other researchers and stakeholders, in disseminating their research and in looking for results’ impact is analyzed. The methodology is based on interviews and surveys directed to Spanish Early Career Researchers (ECRs). The results show the interest of novice researchers in open science, but also the need for recognition of the actions involved in it as a requirement for its consolidation among researchers in a precarious situation. Funding is a critical factor to be considered as well.

scholarly journals Perspectives on Open Science and Scholarly Publishing: a Survey Study Focusing on Early Career Researchers in Europe

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1306
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Berezko ◽  
Laura M. Palma Medina ◽  
Giulia Malaguarnera ◽  
Inês Almeida ◽  
Agnieszka Żyra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gross Domestic Product ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Positive Attitude ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Domestic Product ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
European Regions ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Informed Group

Background: The value of Open Science (OS) for the academic community and society has been becoming more evident recently, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, significant challenges regarding its implementation arise that are likely to affect researchers, especially those in early career stages. Hence, monitoring early-career researchers’ views, knowledge, and skills on OS and related policies, is crucial for its advancement. The main aim of this exploratory study was to gain new perspectives regarding the awareness of and attitudes towards OS and related practices having in consideration geographical, economic and research career variables. Methods: The survey was conducted during May-August 2020 as part of a collaboration between Eurodoc and the Open Research Europe project. The data from the survey were analyzed by European region, Gross domestic product, Gross domestic expenditure on research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product, field of study, and career stage. Results: The awareness and positive attitude regarding OS, specifically among early-career researchers, is high in Europe. However, there are significant career stage group differences in views and knowledge about OS. Generally, awareness and positive attitude tend to increase with increasing career seniority. Regarding European regions, we spotted three main groups sharing similar awareness levels and attitudes: researchers in Western Europe - the most informed group towards OS; researchers in northern, central, and southern Europe - a moderately informed group with some minor differences; and researchers in eastern Europe - the least informed group, whose opinions deviate the most. Conclusions: We found that there is an “evolution of needs and focus” regarding scientific publishing: researchers in most European regions are in different stages of transition from the competitive to collaborative levels, while researchers in eastern Europe are largely beginning their transition to the competitive level.

Open Science: A Candid Conversation

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kendal N. Smith ◽  
Matthew C. Makel
Keyword(s):  
Gifted Education ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Communities ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Future Aspirations ◽  
Informal Conversation ◽  
Advanced Academics ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Published Research

In response to concerns about the credibility of many published research findings, open science reforms such as preregistration, data sharing, and alternative forms of publication are being increasingly adopted across scientific communities. Although journals in giftedness and advanced academics research have already implemented several of these practices, they remain unfamiliar to some researchers. In this informal conversation, Kendal Smith and Matthew Makel discuss how they came to know and use open science practices; open science values; benefits and objections; and their future aspirations for open science practices in gifted education research. Their conversation aims to help make open science practices more understandable and actionable for both early career and established researchers.

scholarly journals Early career researchers want Open Science

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Farnham ◽  
Christoph Kurz ◽  
Mehmet Ali Öztürk ◽  
Monica Solbiati ◽  
Oona Myllyntaus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Early Career Researchers

scholarly journals REGISTERED REPORTS FOR ECRS: ENABLING SLOW SCIENCE ON TIGHT TIMELINES

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S24-S24
Author(s):  
Rita Ludwig
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Thinking ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Longitudinal Methods ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Scientific Project ◽  
The Ideal

Abstract Early career researchers (ECRs) may experience tension between the ideal and actual amounts of time they have to complete a scientific project. Sometimes, a timeline is truncated because a citable product is required for applications or fellowship deadlines. This scenario is especially common for researchers who use longitudinal methods, and/or those who work with hard-to-access samples. Registered reports, an open science initiative, offer one resolution to this tension. In registered reports, the steps of analysis planning, manuscript writing, and peer review occur earlier than the traditional journal article publication process. If an in principle acceptance is earned, ECRs are afforded citable, peer-reviewed acknowledgement of their scientific thinking prior to the conclusion of a research project. This talk will serve as a primer on the registered report process. I will also discuss resources for writing registered reports, and provide a list of relevant participating journals in the field of gerontology.

scholarly journals Bad Science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corina Logan ◽  
Erik Lieungh
Keyword(s):  
Human Behavior ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Evolutionary Anthropology ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Senior Researcher ◽  
Science Talk

In this episode of Open Science Talk, we are joined by the founder of the campaign #bulliedintobadscience, Corina Logan. Logan is a Senior Researcher at the Department of Human Behavior, Ecology and Culture at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. She explains what she means by "Bad Science", including important terms like P-hacking/data fishing and HARKing. She also talks about how Open Science could help in the fight against bad science. The #BulliedIntoBadScience (BIBS) campaign consists of early career researchers leading individuals and institutions in adopting open practices to improve research rigor (from all fields, not only the sciences). The host of this episode is Erik Lieungh. This episode was first published 3 December 2018.

scholarly journals Opening the Door to Registered Reports: Census of Journals Publishing Registered Reports (2013–2020)

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Kay Montoya ◽  
William Leo Donald Krenzer ◽  
Jessica Louise Fossum
Keyword(s):  
Research Team ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
High Variability ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Early Adoption ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Publication Workflow

Registered reports are a new publication workflow where the decision to publish is made prior to data collection and analysis and thus cannot be dependent on the outcome of the study. An increasing number of journals have adopted this new mechanism, but previous research suggests that submission rates are still relatively low. We conducted a census of journals publishing registered reports (N = 278) using independent coders to collect information from submission guidelines, with the goal of documenting journals’ early adoption of registered reports. Our results show that the majority of journals adopting registered reports are in psychology, and it typically takes about a year to publish the first registered report after adopting. Still, many journals have not published their first registered report. There is high variability in impact of journals adopting registered reports. Many journals do not include concrete information about policies that address concerns about registered reports (e.g., exploratory analysis); however, those that do typically allow these practices with some restrictions. Additionally, other open science practices are commonly encouraged or required as part of the registered report process, especially open data and materials. Overall, many journals did not include many of the fields coded by the research team, which could be a barrier to submission for some authors. Though the majority of journals allow authors to be anonymous during the review process, a sizable portion do not, which could also be a barrier to submission. We conclude with future directions and implications for authors of registered reports, journals that have already adopted registered reports, and journals that may consider adopting registered reports in the future.

scholarly journals Exploring factors that influence the practice of Open Science by early career health researchers: a mixed methods study

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ksenija Zečević ◽  
Catherine Houghton ◽  
Chris Noone ◽  
Hopin Lee ◽  
Karen Matvienko-Sikar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Individual Interviews ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Research Cycle ◽  
Global Movement

Background: There is a growing global movement towards open science and ensuring that health research is more transparent. It is vital that the researchers are adequately prepared for this research environment from early in their careers. However, the barriers and enablers to practicing open science for early career researchers (ECRs) have been explored to a limited extent. This study aimed to explore the views, experiences and factors influencing open science practices amongst ECRs working in health research. Methods: Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of ECRs working in health research. Participants also completed surveys regarding the factors influencing open science practices. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data and descriptive statistical analyses were used to analyse survey data. Results: 14 ECRs participated. Two main themes were identified from interview data; Valuing Open Science and Creating a Culture for Open Science. Within ‘Valuing Open Science’, participants spoke about the conceptualisation of open science to be open across the entire research cycle, and important for producing better and more impactful research for patients and the public. Within ‘Creating a Culture of Open Science’ participants spoke about a number of factors influencing their practice of open science. These included cultural and academic pressures, the positives and negatives of increased accountability and transparency, and the need for more training and supporting resources to facilitate open science practices. Conclusion: ECRs see the importance of open science for beneficially impacting patient and public health but many feel that they are not fully supported to practice open science. Resources and supports including education and training are needed, as are better incentives for open science activities. Crucially, tangible engagement from institutions, funders and researchers is needed to facilitate the development of an open science culture.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document