scholarly journals Accelerating your research career with open science

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Norris

We could all benefit from our research and the research of others being more transparent and accessible to all, regardless of our career stage or research field. ‘Open Science’ provides us with a range of research practices designed to make the processes, data, analysis and outputs more reproducible, understandable and accessible. These practices range from making the protocol of your research explicit and publicly available via study pre-registration or Registered Report, to making a final published paper freely available via Open Access publishing or pre-print. This chapter will outline issues and challenges in research that Open Science helps to reduce. It will outline what Open Science is and how it can be integrated into your research workflow and summarise some global initiatives to increase Open Science uptake. The chapter will end by discussing how Open Science can benefit and accelerate your career and give you some tips on how to get started.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley David McAuliff ◽  
Melanie B. Fessinger ◽  
Anthony Perillo ◽  
Jennifer Torkildson Perillo

As the field of psychology and law begins to embrace more transparent and accessible science, many questions arise about what open science actually is and how to do it. In this chapter, we contextualize this reform by examining fundamental concerns about psychological research—irreproducibility and replication failures, false-positive errors, and questionable research practices—that threaten its validity and credibility. Next, we turn to psychology’s response by reviewing the concept of open science and explaining how to implement specific practices—preregistration, registered reports, open materials/data/code, and open access publishing—designed to make research more transparent and accessible. We conclude by weighing the implications of open science for the field of psychology and law, specifically with respect to how we conduct and evaluate research, as well as how we train the next generation of psychological scientists and share scientific findings in applied settings.


Publications ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel Knöchelmann

Open science refers to both the practices and norms of more open and transparent communication and research in scientific disciplines and the discourse on these practices and norms. There is no such discourse dedicated to the humanities. Though the humanities appear to be less coherent as a cluster of scholarship than the sciences are, they do share unique characteristics which lead to distinct scholarly communication and research practices. A discourse on making these practices more open and transparent needs to take account of these characteristics. The prevalent scientific perspective in the discourse on more open practices does not do so, which confirms that the discourse’s name, open science, indeed excludes the humanities so that talking about open science in the humanities is incoherent. In this paper, I argue that there needs to be a dedicated discourse for more open research and communication practices in the humanities, one that integrates several elements currently fragmented into smaller, unconnected discourses (such as on open access, preprints, or peer review). I discuss three essential elements of open science—preprints, open peer review practices, and liberal open licences—in the realm of the humanities to demonstrate why a dedicated open humanities discourse is required.


eLife ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin C McKiernan ◽  
Philip E Bourne ◽  
C Titus Brown ◽  
Stuart Buck ◽  
Amye Kenall ◽  
...  

Open access, open data, open source and other open scholarship practices are growing in popularity and necessity. However, widespread adoption of these practices has not yet been achieved. One reason is that researchers are uncertain about how sharing their work will affect their careers. We review literature demonstrating that open research is associated with increases in citations, media attention, potential collaborators, job opportunities and funding opportunities. These findings are evidence that open research practices bring significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-28
Author(s):  
C. Rossel ◽  
L. van Dyck

The movement towards an Open Science is well engaged and irreversible. It includes Open Access publishing, Open Data and Open Collaborations with several new orientations, among which citizen science. Indeed, in the digital era, the way research is performed, its output shared and published is changing significantly, as are the expectations of policy makers and society at large.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Cutler ◽  
Tormod Strømme ◽  
Irene Eikefjord

See video of the presentation.In 2013 The University of Bergen established a publication fund to cover the costs for publishing Open Access. The fund covers Article Processing Charges (APC) in both Open Access journals and hybrid Open Access in subscription journals. The publication fund at The University of Bergen is one of few in Norway that includes support for hybrid Open Access. The hybrid model is controversial because the publisher receives income twice for the same article, first through APC and then through subscriptions.The arguments for including hybrid were: (1) there are more journals to choose from, hence giving more researchers the opportunity and initiative to publish Open Access. (2) the quality issue of Open Access journals. The University believed that by including hybrid more articles would be published Open Access in renowned journals. This because a larger percentage of hybrid journals are registered on level 2 in the Norwegian System for defining quality of publication channels.The fund has been a success in so far that it has led to an increase in Open Access articles in high quality journals, also within research fields that traditionally do not publish Open Access. The fund has granted applications for almost 9 million NOK. Of a total of 437 granted applications, 278 (64 %) are articles in hybrid journals. 103 articles (24 %) have been published on level 2; 11 in Open Access-journals and 92 hybrid.When it comes to research field, the results show that about 90 % of granted applications come from researchers within medicine, psychology and the natural sciences, including many fields that already have a tradition for publishing their research Open Access. The fund has only led to a slight increase in Open Access publishing with APC within the humanities, social sciences and law.Researchers are happy with hybrid publishing because they are able to continue publishing in the same journals as before. It is also the case that support of hybrid publishing results in more Open Access articles in high quality journals according to the Norwegian system. Yet, support for hybrid publishing has so far not altered which research fields that publish Open Access, although there has been an increase of Open Access publications within all faculties.Our presentation will form a basis for discussing a number of questions pertaining to the hybrid model: What have the academic and economic consequences of the hybrid model been? Do all researchers at the University have the same opportunity to publish their research Open Access? Has support of hybrid lead to more Open Access in renowned publication channels?The University has appointed a group to evaluate the publication fund and recommend if and how it shall continue. Will the fund continue to support hybrid after the trial period ends in 2015?


Author(s):  
Shaghayegh Abdolahzadeh ◽  
Peter G. Braun ◽  
Christina Elsenga ◽  
Marijke Folgering-van der Vliet ◽  
Babette Knauer ◽  
...  

The academic landscape of the Netherlands has been influenced in recent years by new governmental policies regarding open access and open science, national and European legal guidelines, developments in ICT, and changes in how researchers are assessed. The University of Groningen Library (UB) has seized the opportunity in these developments, providing research support in the domains of registration and archiving of research output, open access publishing, research data management, and research analytics. Increased efficiency in traditional library procedures and the introduction of project-based funding have provided staff capacity for these developments. Full-service customization, to meet the needs of researchers and alleviate their time and work pressure, lies at the heart of the UB's research support.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bård Smedsrød ◽  
Eirik Reierth ◽  
Lars Moksness ◽  
Leif Longva

Watch the VIDEO of the presentation.Journal coordinated peer reviewing, a hallmark of scholarly publishing, is also a pivotal part of other central academic processes, such as evaluation of research grant applications, and ranking of applicants for faculty/research positions. Hence, journal coordinated peer reviewing may be viewed as “the mother of academic peer reviewing”. On this background, it is astonishing that universities and other public R&D institutions take only a very limited interest in the management and policy shaping of this cornerstone of scholarly publishing.We suggest that the universities need to become more aware of the pivotal role of the peer reviewing jobs carried out by their professors and researchers. The peer reviewing should be viewed as a partial, in kind payment from the institutions involved to the journal publishers. The advantages of this are manifold: i) negotiating power that may lead to easier and quicker implementation of open access publishing and/or ii) reducing costs, in particular the unjustifiably high subscription and licensing rates set by the big commercial publishing houses; iii) better control of how scientific staff use their time for the good of the university; iv) managing a unified policy shaping of peer reviewing, reducing fraud and flaws. This will in turn increase quality of the research produced by the universities.    The EU has recently announced their goal of making all European scientific articles freely accessible by 2020. This announcement was made unanimously by the EU ministers responsible for research and innovation. The ministers have not announced what means to use in achieving their announced goal. We suggest a united approach whereby taking control of the peer review job could be an interesting road to follow. Such a unified international action among universities and grant agencies would be very beneficial in order to make the changes needed to establish peer reviewing as a truly academically based responsibility. The increasing international agreements and actions to implement open access publishing are indications that such changes are possible. By standing together universities will be able to break the economic grip that the big commercial publishing houses have on academic research.Some may argue that it is the right of each individual scientist to decide on the extent and for what journal to perform peer reviewing. However, if an employer for some reason limits the amount of time used to do peer reviewing for certain commercial publishing houses, it would not interfere with the academic freedom to do research and to choose freely where and how to publish. After all, work contracts include instructions on how to perform a certain amount of teaching, administration and research. The option of directing where to do or not to do peer review should not be very controversial.By taking control of and organizing peer reviewing universities would obtain a means to regain the academic freedom that was lost when commercial enterprises took over the society driven journals, introducing heavy paywalls. And it may facilitate a development towards an open science regime.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene N. Andreassen ◽  
Erik Lieungh

In this episode, we are discussing how to teach open science to PhD students. Helene N. Andreassen, head of Library Teaching and Learning Support at the University Library of UiT the Arctic University of Norway shares her experiences with the integration of open science in a special, tailor-made course for PhD's that have just started their project. An interdisciplinary, discussion-based course, "Take Control of Your PhD Journey: From (P)reflection to Publishing" consists of a series of seminars on research data management, open access publishing and other subject matters pertaining to open science. First published online February 26, 2020.


Author(s):  
Rosana López-Carreño ◽  
Ángel M. Delgado-Vázquez ◽  
Francisco-Javier Martínez-Méndez

This paper analyses the set of scientific publications in open access, other than journals (monographs, conferences proceedings, teaching materials and grey literature), published by Spanish public universities, studying their volume, documentary typology, level of description and open access policies with the aim of measuring their degree of incorporation and compliance with the principles of Open Science. An exhaustive review of the disposed material in open access by these publishers has been carried out, which has allowed to make a diagnosis of their level of open access publishing. Grey literature is the most common documentary type followed by the monograph, in the open publication of these publishers that does not reach even 5% of the average editorial production. The results allow us to conclude that the academic publishing, and more specifically the academic books in open access, still has a very reduced presence within the editorial production of these institutions. Resumen Este trabajo analiza el conjunto de las publicaciones científicas en acceso abierto, distintas de las revistas científicas (monografías, actas de congresos, materiales didácticos y literatura gris), dispuestas para su consulta por las editoriales universitarias públicas, estudiando su volumen, tipología documental, nivel de descripción y políticas de acceso abierto con el objetivo de medir el grado de incorporación y cumplimiento de los principios de Ciencia Abierta. Se ha llevado a cabo una exhaustiva revisión del material publicado en acceso abierto por estas editoriales que ha permitido establecer un diagnóstico de su nivel de edición en acceso abierto. La literatura gris es el tipo documental más frecuente seguido de la monografía, en la publicación en abierto de las editoriales universitarias que no alcanza ni el 5% de la producción editorial universitaria. Los resultados permiten concluir que la publicación académica, y más concretamente el libro en acceso abierto, sigue teniendo una presencia muy reducida dentro de la producción editorial de estas instituciones.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document