Open notebook science as an emerging epistemic culture within the Open Science movement

Resumo: Os repositórios têm se tornado comum nas universidades e institutos de pesquisa, como forma de ofertar acesso à produção científica e, com isso, dar visibilidade à instituição. Entretanto, em muitos casos ainda estão restritos aos conceitos do movimento do arquivo aberto e acesso aberto, sendo que já se discute o Movimento da Ciência Aberta, revelando certo descompasso, requerendo estudos que apoiem a atualização dessa importante ferramenta. Nesse sentido, o presente estudo verifica os requisitos envolvidos nos movimentos abertos, de forma a apoiar a discussão técnica e tecnológica. Um estudo bibliográfico, que transforma as informações sobre os movimentos em critérios para avaliação de ferramentas para criação de repositórios, apresentando a implementação da interação como um novo desafio. Nas considerações procura-se contribuir com a discussão sobre a Ciência Aberta, de forma mais aplicada bem como o ajuste dos repositórios a esse movimento.Palavras-chave: Repositórios. Critérios de avaliação. Arquivo aberto. Acesso aberto. Dados abertos. Ciência aberta.SURVEY OF CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF REPOSITORY TOOLS ACCORDING TO OPEN SCIENCE Abstract: Repositories have become common in universities and research institutes, as a way of offering access to scientific production, thereby giving visibility to the institution. Meanwhile, in many cases, repositories are restricted to the concepts of open movement and open access considering that the Open Science Movement is already being discussed. Regarding this matter, this study verifies the requirements involved in the open movements, in order to support a technical and technological discussion. A bibliographic study that transforms information about movements into criteria to evaluate tools used to create repositories, presenting an implementation of interaction as a new challenge. In the considerations, we contribute with a discussion about an Open Science, in a more applied way, as well as the adjustment of the repositories to this movement.Keywords: Repositories. Evaluation Criteria. Open File. Open Access. Open Data. Open Science.

Download Full-text

Alchemy & algorithms: perspectives on the philosophy and history of open science

Research Ideas and Outcomes ◽

10.3897/rio.5.e35913 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 5 ◽

Author(s):

Leo Lahti ◽

Filipe da Silva ◽

Markus Laine ◽

Viivi Lähteenoja ◽

Mikko Tolonen

Keyword(s):

Academic Research ◽

Open Science ◽

Ethical Challenges ◽

Community Resource ◽

Philosophical Foundations ◽

The Past ◽

History Of ◽

Video And Audio ◽

The University ◽

Science Movement

This paper gives the reader a chance to experience, or revisit, PHOS16: a conference on the History and Philosophy of Open Science. In the winter of 2016, we invited a varied international group to engage with these topics at the University of Helsinki, Finland. Our aim was to critically assess the defining features, underlying narratives, and overall objectives of the open science movement. The event brought together contemporary open science scholars, publishers, and advocates to discuss the philosophical foundations and historical roots of openness in academic research. The eight sessions combined historical views with more contemporary perspectives on topics such as transparency, reproducibility, collaboration, publishing, peer review, research ethics, as well as societal impact and engagement. We gathered together expert panellists and 15 invited speakers who have published extensively on these topics, allowing us to engage in a thorough and multifaceted discussion. Together with our involved audience we charted the role and foundations of openness of research in our time, considered the accumulation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, and debated the various technical, legal, and ethical challenges of the past and present. In this article, we provide an overview of the topics covered at the conference as well as individual video interviews with each speaker. In addition to this, all the talks, Q&A sessions, and interviews were recorded and they are offered here as an openly licensed community resource in both video and audio form.

Download Full-text

Improving Social Science: Lessons from the Open Science Movement

10.31235/osf.io/6whjt ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Per Engzell ◽

Julia Marie Rohrer

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Social Science ◽

Open Science ◽

Scientific Exchange ◽

Research Transparency ◽

Science Movement

The transdisciplinary movement towards greater research transparency opens the door for a meta-scientific exchange between different social sciences. In the spirit of such an exchange, we offer some lessons inspired by ongoing debates in psychology, highlighting the broad benefits of open science but also potential pitfalls, as well as practical challenges in the implementation that have not yet been fully resolved. Our discussion is aimed towards political scientists but relevant for population sciences more broadly.

Download Full-text

Open Science and Its Impact on Libraries, Publishers, and Authors

Advances in Library and Information Science - Handbook of Research on Emerging Trends and Technologies in Library and Information Science ◽

10.4018/978-1-5225-9825-1.ch007 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 97-108

Author(s):

Josiline Phiri Chigwada

Keyword(s):

Information Sources ◽

Research Output ◽

Research Process ◽

Open Science ◽

The Body ◽

Digital Era ◽

Body Of Knowledge ◽

Structured Document ◽

Science Movement

The open science movement enables the accessibility and reusability of research output across the globe. Researchers and other stakeholders in the research process can now easily collaborate to add to the body of knowledge. This chapter documents how open science is impacting the role of libraries, publishers, and authors in the digital era. A structured document analysis and web analysis were done to find out how authors, publishers, and librarians are affected by open science. It was found that librarians are taking advantage of open science to provide various information sources to patrons, the publishers are now charging article processing fees to make the journal articles open access upon publishing, and authors are now able to access many information sources during the research process and enjoy greater visibility of their research output. The author recommends the adoption of open science especially in the developing countries and the enactment of policies that support open science at national, regional, and international levels.

Download Full-text

Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science

Scientometrics ◽

10.1007/s11192-020-03488-4 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 125 (2) ◽

pp. 1033-1051

Author(s):

Dietmar Wolfram ◽

Peiling Wang ◽

Adam Hembree ◽

Hyoungjoo Park

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Open Science ◽

Turn Of The Century ◽

Bibliographic Databases ◽

Early Adopters ◽

Steady Growth ◽

Scientific Disciplines ◽

Review Reports ◽

Science Movement ◽

Different Levels

AbstractOpen peer review (OPR), where review reports and reviewers’ identities are published alongside the articles, represents one of the last aspects of the open science movement to be widely embraced, although its adoption has been growing since the turn of the century. This study provides the first comprehensive investigation of OPR adoption, its early adopters and the implementation approaches used. Current bibliographic databases do not systematically index OPR journals, nor do the OPR journals clearly state their policies on open identities and open reports. Using various methods, we identified 617 OPR journals that published at least one article with open identities or open reports as of 2019 and analyzed their wide-ranging implementations to derive emerging OPR practices. The findings suggest that: (1) there has been a steady growth in OPR adoption since 2001, when 38 journals initially adopted OPR, with more rapid growth since 2017; (2) OPR adoption is most prevalent in medical and scientific disciplines (79.9%); (3) five publishers are responsible for 81% of the identified OPR journals; (4) early adopter publishers have implemented OPR in different ways, resulting in different levels of transparency. Across the variations in OPR implementations, two important factors define the degree of transparency: open identities and open reports. Open identities may include reviewer names and affiliation as well as credentials; open reports may include timestamped review histories consisting of referee reports and author rebuttals or a letter from the editor integrating reviewers’ comments. When and where open reports can be accessed are also important factors indicating the OPR transparency level. Publishers of optional OPR journals should add metric data in their annual status reports.

Download Full-text

Open Science lernen und lehren: FOSTER Portal stellt Materialien und Kurse bereit

Information - Wissenschaft & Praxis ◽

10.1515/iwp-2015-0029 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 66 (2-3) ◽

Author(s):

Astrid Orth ◽

Birgit Schmidt

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Citizen Science ◽

Open Data ◽

Open Science ◽

European Research ◽

Europäische Kommission ◽

Open Notebook Science ◽

Science Training

Open Science ist ein relativ junger Begriff, die zugrunde liegende Idee des Teilens von Wissen, Ergebnissen und Methoden ist jedoch so alt ist wie die Wissenschaft selbst. Open Science umfasst neben Open Access und Open Data – dem offenen Zugang zu Veröffentlichungen und Forschungsdaten – auch radikal neue Bereiche wie Citizen Science und Open Notebook Science. Seitdem die Europäische Kommission und andere Forschungsförderer zunehmend Open Access zu Publikationen und Daten in ihre Förderrichtlinien aufnehmen, ist es für Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler unumgänglich geworden, sich mit diesem Thema auseinanderzusetzen. Die Herausforderung bei der Umsetzung dieser Anforderungen ist nicht so sehr die Existenz und Zugänglichkeit relevanter Informationen, sondern die unübersichtliche Fülle an Material. Das von der Europäischen Kommission geförderte Projekt „Facilitating Open Science Training for European Research“ (FOSTER) führt deshalb eine breite Sammlung von Materialien und Kursen zum Thema Open Science zusammen und schafft so eine Lernressource für die europäische Forschungscommunity. Die Inhalte stehen möglichst über offene Lizenzen zur Verfügung, um die Nachnutzung in weiteren Schulungen zu unterstützen. Die Navigation durch die Fülle an Inhalten erfolgt entlang einer Taxonomie oder anhand von zielgruppenspezifischen Lernzielen, die zum Beispiel Projektmanager oder Multiplikatoren wie Bibliothekare adressieren. Der Artikel stellt die aktuellen Ergebnisse des Projektes vor, beleuchtet die Rolle der Niedersächsischen Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen im Projekt und gibt einen Ausblick auf die Aktivitäten im zweiten Projektjahr.

Download Full-text

EuroRxiv: a European open science repository

10.31226/osf.io/ey459 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Khaled Moustafa

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Scientific Knowledge ◽

Open Science ◽

Free Access ◽

Publicly Funded ◽

European Languages ◽

Open Access Journals ◽

Technical Issues ◽

Set Up ◽

Science Movement

Open and free access to scientific knowledge keeps scientists up to date with the latest achievements in their respective fields and to help set up appropriate solutions to health, environmental and technical issues. One of the efficient settings toward this purpose is the use of preprint servers- open repositories that allow authors to post their manuscripts ahead of formal peer review/publishing in traditional journals. The recognition of preprints as an essential part of science landscape are on the rise worldwide.In 2018, a European funder coalition, called Coalition S, has been formed and issued an open access plan, called Plan S, that requires authors of studies funded by the Coalition to publish their manuscripts- starting from January 2021- in open access journals or repositories that meet the guidelines of the Plan S. Many publishers and researchers welcomed the Plan S as a step forward to promote openness and free access to publicly funded research. To further enhance the open and free science movement, I'd propose a European preprint server called "European arXiv" (https://eurorxiv.eu) as a multidisciplinary and multilingual repository that will accept manuscripts (preprints and postprints) in the various European languages and beyond. The project is an individual initiative, but interested people are welcome to join.

Download Full-text

Ciência Aberta Na França: ponto da situação, legislação, iniciativas, ferramentas e medidas

Páginas a&b Arquivos & Bibliotecas ◽

10.21747/21836671/pagnespc1 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 3-16

Author(s):

Clara Galliano ◽

Luc Quoniam ◽

David Raymond

Keyword(s):

Open Science ◽

Research Data ◽

International Level ◽

European Level ◽

Current Position ◽

Scientific Publications ◽

Academic Communities ◽

World Class ◽

Science Movement ◽

Opening Up

Issues related to open access to scientific publications and the reuse of research data concern research actors, academic communities and society as a whole. Many countries have mobilised themselves around these issues in order to establish policies in favour of the opening up of science. France is both a promoter and coordinator of open science at national and European level. This country has also expressed its commitment at the international level by joining world-class initiatives and coalitions. Faced with the power of certain private players in the publishing market, France insists on its current position: the aim is not to destroy them but rather not to be totally dependent on them. This communication proposes to take France as an example to complement and reinforce the commitment of certain countries to the Open Science movement.

Download Full-text

La educación abierta en Europa: avances, integración con la ciencia abierta y rol bibliotecario.

BiD textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentaci� ◽

10.1344/bid2019.43.27 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Gema Santos Hermosa

Keyword(s):

Policy Design ◽

Open Science ◽

Open Education ◽

Current Development ◽

Education Policies ◽

Information Professionals ◽

The Relationship ◽

Science Movement ◽

Opening Up ◽

Over Time

This paper provides an overview of open education in Europe, focusing on higher education. It begins by considering how the notion of ‘contemporary open education’ has evolved over time. It then reviews the various open education-related initiatives that have been promoted by the European Commission, from the institution of an open education framework to the current development of education policies. It also reports on specific initiatives and makes a series of recommendations about policy design oriented to opening up education. It analyses the relationship between open education and the open science movement, specifically the manner in which open education can be contextualised in the emergent paradigm of open science. Finally, the paper considers how academic libraries should be supporting open education and examines the influence that information professionals can bring to bear in this field.

Download Full-text

Advancing Transparency and Impact of Research: Initiating Crosstalk between Indigenous Research and Mainstream “Open Science”

10.31219/osf.io/bg9a4 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

P. Priscilla Lui ◽

Monica C. Skewes ◽

Sarah Gobrial ◽

David Rollock

Keyword(s):

Negative Impact ◽

Community Based Participatory Research ◽

Open Science ◽

Research Approach ◽

Indigenous Research ◽

Native Communities ◽

Psychological Science ◽

Human Functioning ◽

Replication Crisis ◽

Science Movement

To answer questions about human psychology, psychological science needs to yield credible findings. Because of their goals of understanding people’s lived experiences and advocating for the needs of the Native communities, Indigenous scholars tend to use community-based participatory research (CBPR) or approach science from a constructivist framework. The primary goal of mainstream psychological science is to uncover generalizable facts about human functioning. Approached from a postpositivist framework, mainstream psychological scholars tend to assume the possibility of identifying researcher biases and achieving objective science. Recently, many psychological findings fail to replicate in new samples. The replication crisis raised concerns about the validity of psychological science. The mainstream open science has been promoted as a solution to this replication crisis; the open science movement encourages researchers to emphasize transparency and accountability to the broad research community. The notion of transparency aligns with the principles of CBPR—research approach common in Indigenous research. Yet, open science practices are not widely adopted in Indigenous research, and mainstream open science does not emphasize researchers’ accountability to the communities that their science is intended to serve. We examined Indigenous researchers’ awareness and concerns about mainstream open science. Participants endorsed the value of transparency with the participants and their communities. They also were concerned about being disadvantaged and the possible negative impact of data sharing on the Native communities. We suggest that there is value in connecting mainstream open science and Indigenous research to advance science that empowers people and makes positive community impact.

Download Full-text