scholarly journals Where Do Early Career Researchers Stand on Open Science Practices? A Survey Within the Max Planck Society

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Toribio-Flórez ◽  
Lukas Anneser ◽  
Felipe Nathan deOliveira-Lopes ◽  
Martijn Pallandt ◽  
Isabell Tunn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Max Planck Society ◽  
Doctoral Candidates ◽  
Scientific Fields

Open science (OS) is of paramount importance for the improvement of science worldwide and across research fields. Recent years have witnessed a transition toward open and transparent scientific practices, but there is still a long way to go. Early career researchers (ECRs) are of crucial relevance in the process of steering toward the standardization of OS practices, as they will become the future decision makers of the institutional change that necessarily accompanies this transition. Thus, it is imperative to gain insight into where ECRs stand on OS practices. Under this premise, the Open Science group of the Max Planck PhDnet designed and conducted an online survey to assess the stance toward OS practices of doctoral candidates from the Max Planck Society. As one of the leading scientific institutions for basic research worldwide, the Max Planck Society provides a considerable population of researchers from multiple scientific fields, englobed into three sections: biomedical sciences, chemistry, physics and technology, and human and social sciences. From an approximate total population of 5,100 doctoral candidates affiliated with the Max Planck Society, the survey collected responses from 568 doctoral candidates. The survey assessed self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and implementation of different OS practices, namely, open access publications, open data, preregistrations, registered reports, and replication studies. ECRs seemed to hold a generally positive view toward these different practices and to be interested in learning more about them. Furthermore, we found that ECRs’ knowledge and positive attitudes predicted the extent to which they implemented these OS practices, although levels of implementation were rather low in the past. We observed differences and similarities between scientific sections. We discuss these differences in terms of need and feasibility to apply these OS practices in specific scientific fields, but additionally in relation to the incentive systems that shape scientific communities. Lastly, we discuss the implications that these results can have for the training and career advancement of ECRs, and ultimately, for the consolidation of OS practices.

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 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 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 First person – Kira Allmeroth

2021 ◽  
Vol 134 (9) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Cell Fate ◽  
Early Career ◽  
First Person ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Stem Cell Fate ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Hair Follicle Stem Cell ◽  
Selection Of

ABSTRACT First Person is a series of interviews with the first authors of a selection of papers published in Journal of Cell Science, helping early-career researchers promote themselves alongside their papers. Kira Allmeroth is first author on ‘ N1-acetylspermidine is a determinant of hair follicle stem cell fate’, published in JCS. Kira conducted the research described in this article while a PhD student in Martin Denzel's lab at the Max Planck Insitute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany. She is now a postdoc in the Denzel lab, investigating stem cells and metabolism.

scholarly journals Data from a survey on the impact of the pandemic on early-stage academics

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 138
Author(s):  
Edyta Swider-Cios ◽  
Katalin Solymosi ◽  
Mangala Srinivas
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Group Leaders ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Share Data ◽  
The Impact

We would like to share data from a survey run by the Young Academy of Europe (YAE) from June to October 2020, with questions aiming to unravel the situation of early-career researchers (including early stage group leaders) working in Europe, during the COVID-19 pandemic. We were particularly interested in the impact of care activities (related to young children or other family members), and the impact of gender. We include the online survey and collected data, without identifying information. The survey is published in Nature Career Column (July, 2021) (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01952-6).

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.

scholarly journals First person – Sarita Hebbar and Malte Lehmann

Biology Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. bio058519
Keyword(s):  
Metabolic Pathways ◽  
Cell Biology ◽  
Early Career ◽  
First Person ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Splicing Regulator ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel ◽  
Molecular Cell Biology ◽  
Selection Of

ABSTRACTFirst Person is a series of interviews with the first authors of a selection of papers published in Biology Open, helping early-career researchers promote themselves alongside their papers. Sarita Hebbar and Malte Lehmann are co-first authors on ‘Mutations in the splicing regulator Prp31 lead to retinal degeneration in Drosophila’, published in BiO. Sarita is a post-doctoral fellow in the lab of Elisabeth Knust at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology & Genetics, investigating how the same metabolic pathways regulate temporally distinct processes (in morphogenesis and later in tissue homoestasis). Malte is a post-doctoral researcher and physician in the lab of R. G. Kühl and A. G. Siegmund at Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, investigating the mechanisms behind inflammation in Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients.

An Editor's Guide to Writing and Publishing Science

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hochberg
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Chief Editor ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Discussion Groups ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Postdoctoral Researchers ◽  
Writing Science ◽  
Scientific Fields

Scientists must communicate their work through clear writing and publish it where it will be read. To succeed, you need method, but also need to understand the worlds of journals, publishers and science evaluation. The Editor’s Guide to Writing and Publishing Science provides a comprehensive approach to how to write engaging papers, and strategies for publishing where they will be read and have impact. Drawing on decades of experience as a scientist, mentor and chief editor, Michael Hochberg offers a unique, authoritative view on writing science and into the little-known worlds of journals and publication. Succeeding in science means being a citizen of science, and The Editor’s Guide educates the reader in some of the most pressing issues and possible solutions, and provides key references for deeper exploration. Developing one’s career does not mean careerism, and Hochberg provides guidelines and advice for young researchers to engage in the craft of science, forge collaborations, contribute to the scientific commons as a peer reviewer and interact through social media. Understanding the challenges and opportunities in publishing is only possible with knowledge of how science communication is changing, and the reader is introduced to the important, emerging world of Open Science. Written in a practical and accessible way for students, postdoctoral researchers, early-career scientists and professionals across a wide range of scientific fields, The Editor’s Guide is a powerful tool for learning and improving individual skills, and can be the basis for discussion groups, or used as a text for dedicated classroom courses.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document