scholarly journals Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeleine Pownall ◽  
Catherine V. Talbot ◽  
Anna Henschel ◽  
Alexandra Lautarescu ◽  
Kelly Lloyd ◽  
...  

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.

2021 ◽  
pp. 036168432110292
Author(s):  
Madeleine Pownall ◽  
Catherine V. Talbot ◽  
Anna Henschel ◽  
Alexandra Lautarescu ◽  
Kelly E. Lloyd ◽  
...  

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.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher P G Allen ◽  
David Marc Anton Mehler

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.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunjin Song ◽  
David Matthew Markowitz ◽  
Samuel Hardman Taylor

Researchers often focus on the benefits of adopting open science practices for improving the credibility of research studies, yet questions remain whether the general public, as well as academics, value and trust studies consistent with open science practices. In the current package of studies, we examined how open science can increase trust in science for the public and academics as well. In three preregistered experiments (total N = 2,214), we manipulated journal article abstracts to contain descriptions of open science practices or not. Across all studies, open science research was perceived as more credible and trustworthy than non-open science research. Study 2 explored if open science practices compensated for negative perceptions of privately-funded research versus publicly-funded research, though we did not find evidence for this claim. Finally, Study 3 examined perceptions of open science from communication science scholars and observed open science research was perceived more favorably than non-open science research, though the effect was only pronounced for early career researchers. We discuss implications for the open science movement and public trust in science.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niamh Brennan ◽  
Shane Collins ◽  
Linda Doyle ◽  
Helen Shenton

‘The Open Science revolution will be led by early-career researchers.’  Professor Linda Doyle (Dean of Research, Trinity College Dublin). Major challenges in scholarly communication worldwide have occurred over the past twenty years, but real change has been slow. However, this generation of early career researchers looks likely to finally transform the culture. SOAPbox is a drive led by Trinity College Dublin students to rapidly transform their publishing culture and processes to open access, and in doing so, to fully integrate them into the dynamically-evolving open research environment. While student open access publishing is not new, SOAPbox is distinguished by its agility, its scale and its collective focus and ambition, sustained by its alignment with global and institutional policies and objectives. This has enabled SOAPbox to capture the imagination of a university and, more than any other single initiative, galvanise its community into positive engagement with open access. In this presentation, we outline SOAPbox, its rapid progress and the cultural factors that define it. We explore how this multidisciplinary, inter-generational Open Science community of practice works; we identify early learnings from the project and provide insights into the key issues facing early-career researchers engaged in Open Science publishing. Trinity College Dublin has a history of leadership and collaboration in Open Science, technically (e.g. early CRIS/IR integration; eDeposit Ireland) and from the policy perspective (e.g. EURAB Scholarly Publication Group (Chair, 2007); EC OSPP Board and Working Group representation; Ireland’s National Open Research Forum). In 2018, the Dean of Research and the College Librarian created the TCD Open Scholarship Taskforce which includes faculty deans, researchers, library & HR personal, IT professionals and students. Central to this initiative is an understanding that the successful transition to Open Science requires radical changes in how we approach and value the practice of research. The Taskforce supports projects like SOAPbox that have a transformative effect on research culture.   We will explore the SOAPbox Key Signifiers of Transformation: The Big Bang. Very rapid platform development with lightning-fast transformation of a significant number of journals (student-run alongside illustrious academic journals); Inclusiveness. A multi-disciplinary Open Science publishing community of practice across all disciplines and all research career stages (undergraduate and postgraduate students ­– alongside senior academics managing centuries-old journals); Ethical, Sustainable, Global Responsibility. Supporting positive societal, economic and cultural impact of research, with a specific emphasis on the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals; Cultural Change: an embedded, creative training and education strand, employing innovation expertise, a Certificate in Scholarly Communication (an additional extrinsic motivator) and periodic surveys to inform an understanding of the experience; Alignment: with the strategic goals of the University and with its graduate attributes, championed by the Dean of Research and supported by the Graduate Students’ Union. SOAPbox is a scholar-led, community-driven, inclusive publishing initiative which has embraced the spirit of ‘glocalisation’. It instills a life-time commitment to Open Science amongst its participants, changing the world, from one university out.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S23-S23
Author(s):  
Jennifer Lodi-Smith ◽  
Eileen K Graham

Abstract The past decade has seen rapid growth in conversations around and progress towards fostering a more transparent, open, and cumulative science. Best practices are being codified and established across fields relevant to gerontology from cancer science to psychological science. Many of the areas currently under development are of particular relevance to gerontologists such as best practices in balancing open science with participant confidentiality or best practices for preregistering archival, longitudinal data analysis. The present panel showcases one of the particular strengths of the open science movement - the contribution that early career researchers are making to these ongoing conversations on best practices. Early career researchers have the opportunity to blend their expertise with technology, their knowledge of their disciplines, and their vision for the future in shaping these conversations. In this panel, three early career researchers share their insights. Pfund presents an introduction to preregistration and the value of preregistration from the perspective of “growing up” within the open science movement. Seaman discusses efforts in and tool for transparency and reproducibility in neuroimaging of aging research. Ludwig introduces the idea of registered reports as a particularly useful form of publication for researchers who use longitudinal methods, and/or those who work with hard-to-access samples. The symposium will include time for the audience to engage the panel in questions and discussion about current efforts in and future directions for transparent, open, and cumulative science efforts in gerontology.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo ◽  
David Nicholas

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Brian A. Eiler ◽  
◽  
Patrick C. Doyle ◽  
Rosemary L. Al-Kire ◽  
Heidi A. Wayment ◽  
...  

This article provides a case study of a student-focused research experience that introduced basic data science skills and their utility for psychological research, providing practical learning experiences for students interested in learning computational social science skills. Skills included programming; acquiring, visualizing, and managing data; performing specialized analyses; and building knowledge about open-science practices.


F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1306
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Berezko ◽  
Laura M. Palma Medina ◽  
Giulia Malaguarnera ◽  
Inês Almeida ◽  
Agnieszka Żyra ◽  
...  

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.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Heirene ◽  
Debi LaPlante ◽  
Eric R. Louderback ◽  
Brittany Keen ◽  
Marjan Bakker ◽  
...  

Study preregistration is one of several “open science” practices (e.g., open data, preprints) that researchers use to improve the transparency and rigour of their research. As more researchers adopt preregistration as a regular research practice, examining the nature and content of preregistrations can help identify strengths and weaknesses of current practices. The value of preregistration, in part, relates to the specificity of the study plan and the extent to which investigators adhere to this plan. We identified 53 preregistrations from the gambling studies field meeting our predefined eligibility criteria and scored their level of specificity using a 23-item protocol developed to measure the extent to which a clear and exhaustive preregistration plan restricts various researcher degrees of freedom (RDoF; i.e., the many methodological choices available to researchers when collecting and analysing data, and when reporting their findings). We also scored studies on a 32-item protocol that measured adherence to the preregistered plan in the study manuscript. We found that gambling preregistrations had low specificity levels on most RDoF. However, a comparison with a sample of cross-disciplinary preregistrations (N = 52; Bakker et al., 2020) indicated that gambling preregistrations scored higher on 12 (of 29) items. Thirteen (65%) of the 20 associated published articles or preprints deviated from the protocol without declaring as much (the mean number of undeclared deviations per article was 2.25, SD = 2.34). Overall, while we found improvements in specificity and adherence over time (2017-2020), our findings suggest the purported benefits of preregistration—including increasing transparency and reducing RDoF—are not fully achieved by current practices. Using our findings, we provide 10 practical recommendations that can be used to support and refine preregistration practices.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kendal N. Smith ◽  
Matthew C. Makel

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document