scholarly journals Funders in Europe and incentivizing Open Science

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Proudman ◽  
Jon Øygarden Flæten ◽  
Konstantinos Glinos ◽  
Robert Terry
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Research Study ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Intrinsic Value ◽  
Open Science ◽  
World Health ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Scholarly Communications ◽  
The Impact

Funders across Europe are using scholarly communications to increase the impact of their grant results, thereby incentivizing researchers to share their research more openly. This panel session will start by describing the results of a research study called the RIF Project that gleans insights into the policy, rewards and incentives being employed by European research funders to encourage open access to publications and research data for the research they fund. The panel will then respond to the findings and will present and share experience on their policies. Funders across Europe are using scholarly communications to increase the impact of their grant results. More than 60 funders responded to a survey that was conducted in early Spring 2019 coming from key international funding bodies, national funding agencies, major charities and foundations, and national academies; from over 25 countries. The study was led by SPARC Europe in consultation with Science Europe, ALLEA and the EFC. Research Consulting conducted the research. The survey is the first of its kind, since it includes national funding agencies, academies, foundations and charities in Europe. What kinds of policy choices have funders made to influence how grantees increase open access to their research results with as few restrictions as possible? How can funders contribute to changing the research evaluation system by exploring ways to evaluate the intrinsic value of research beyond the impact factor for example, by promoting, and considering a wider range of types of research when evaluating grants? How are funders contributing to the investment in open, be it through financing OA journal articles and other material, and supporting infrastructure? The session will provide answers to these questions and will also raise awareness of the areas where funders can do more to strengthen their Open Science policies. Vanessa Proudman (SPARC Europe) will report on the results of the above-mentioned research study. Jon Øygarden Flæten (The Research Council of Norway), Konstantinos Glinos (The European Commission) and Robert Terry (World Health Organization and the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases) will present the views of their funder organizations.

scholarly journals Numbers that tell a story: Measuring the impact of open access books

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Emery ◽  
Mithu Lucraft ◽  
Agata Morka ◽  
Matteo Prandi ◽  
Ros Pyne
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Book Publishing ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Career Progression ◽  
Book Publisher ◽  
Central Theme ◽  
Lack Of Information ◽  
Scholarly Communications ◽  
The Impact

Open access book publishing is gaining momentum, with more than 10,000 titles published worldwide. But compared to the overall number of academic books that are produced, this is still a small percentage. With much research on the benefits to society from open access publication, what can we do to encourage more book authors to choose open access?Springer Nature is a leading academic book publisher – to date, we have published more than 550 open access books since launching OA book options in 2012. Feedback from our OA book authors has shown that metrics are important to them, as the data helps demonstrate the impact of their research to funders, and also supports conversations with their institutions for career progression. However, as highlighted in our white paper ‘The OA effect: How does open access affect the usage of scholarly books?’, some authors feel that there is a lack of information around metrics and book performance. This information may be critically important in helping authors consider the benefits of choosing to publish their book open access.Authors also state that one of the main obstacles to publishing more OA books through the gold route is funding; access to which varies globally and by discipline – a central theme that emerged at our researcher event during Academic Book Week 2018.Meanwhile, funders interviewed for ‘The OA Effect’ told us that they were keen to understand the impact of the OA books they had supported, but few had actually done so; many commented on the difficulties of measuring the impact of research.  In light of these findings, in 2018 we piloted a new “impact report”, based on metrics for an individual funder of OA books. The outcomes of this pilot impact report project will help the scholarly communications community to better understand how publishers can inform funders, authors and their institutions about the impact of their research, and on a wider scale. What are the challenges of sharing the benefits of OA book publishing with researchers across different disciplines, and how can we overcome these challenges?Our poster shows excerpts from the pilot impact report, quotes from authors and funders about research impact, and considers next steps.

scholarly journals Mapping the Current Research Agenda on Scholarly Publishing: Scopus-Indexed Reviews

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 4-10
Author(s):  
Elena Tikhonova ◽  
Lilia Raitskaya
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Publishing Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Science System ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Scholarly Publications ◽  
Editorial Review ◽  
The Impact

Nearly ten years ago, scholarly publishing came to the fore in research on scientific communication spurred by the evolving Open Science system, the reinvention of peer reviews, and new attitudes to scholarly publications in the ranking-based academic environment. Here, the JLE editors revisit the field of scholarly publishing and identify the most popular areas where potential JLE authors might have difficulty. In this editorial, Scopus-indexed reviews are analysed to map the prevailing trends. The editorial review shows that the trends include open access, peer review transparency, the changing role of libraries in scholarly publishing, CrossRef’s initiatives, outsourcing and skills lacking in publishing, the impact of universities’ prescribed lists for publishing research, open-access monographs, and the role of commercial publishers.

scholarly journals Public Microbial Resource Centers: Key Hubs for Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) Microorganisms and Genetic Materials

2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (21) ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Becker ◽  
M. Bosschaerts ◽  
P. Chaerle ◽  
H.-M. Daniel ◽  
A. Hellemans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Biological Materials ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Culture Collections ◽  
Dna Libraries ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Journal Policies ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT In the context of open science, the availability of research materials is essential for knowledge accumulation and to maximize the impact of scientific research. In microbiology, microbial domain biological resource centers (mBRCs) have long-standing experience in preserving and distributing authenticated microbial strains and genetic materials (e.g., recombinant plasmids and DNA libraries) to support new discoveries and follow-on studies. These culture collections play a central role in the conservation of microbial biodiversity and have expertise in cultivation, characterization, and taxonomy of microorganisms. Information associated with preserved biological resources is recorded in databases and is accessible through online catalogues. Legal expertise developed by mBRCs guarantees end users the traceability and legality of the acquired material, notably with respect to the Nagoya Protocol. However, awareness of the advantages of depositing biological materials in professional repositories remains low, and the necessity of securing strains and genetic resources for future research must be emphasized. This review describes the unique position of mBRCs in microbiology and molecular biology through their history, evolving roles, expertise, services, challenges, and international collaborations. It also calls for an increased deposit of strains and genetic resources, a responsibility shared by scientists, funding agencies, and publishers. Journal policies requesting a deposit during submission of a manuscript represent one of the measures to make more biological materials available to the broader community, hence fully releasing their potential and improving openness and reproducibility in scientific research.

Lesson Learned During Covid-19 Pandemic: Impact, Challenges and Opportunities in Nursing Education – A Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 417-422
Author(s):  
Radha. K ◽  
Vijayanarayanan N. ◽  
Sri Devi. K ◽  
Sharat. V. Kondaguli
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Education ◽  
Nursing Students ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Team Work ◽  
Advanced Technology ◽  
World Health ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Class Room ◽  
The Impact

Nursing training is a combination of both theoretical and practical learning experiences that enable nursing students to acquire the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor components for providing nursing care. World Health Day, an annual event organized by WHO, stated that this year is focused on supporting nurses and midwives, many of whom are serving on the frontlines of the COVID-19 response. Globally, COVID-19 has huge impact on academic delivery and adds a further degree of complexity to nursing education due to temporary lock down because most countries have suspended face-to-face teaching/physical class room teaching. Thus, they had to find new alternatives to academic delivery, and virtual classes/on-line mode were the ways forward. In present search, it has attempted to explore the impact of covid-19, challenges and opportunities in nursing education which influences the different aspects of academic activity. It has accelerate the academic delivery by using variety of online platforms and learning management system such as Google class room, Google meet, Google hangout, Zoom meetings, Microsoft team, Cisco webex meeting, go to webinar, you tube streaming, Google duo, college website, social media platforms such as face book groups, whatsApp, telegram etc. Covid-19 has provided a lot challenges and opportunities to learner, educator, university, organization, and evaluation system and research activities. The lesson learned from covid-19 is converting those challenges into opportunities by learning and adopting with advanced technology in teaching-learning; blended learning; team work; promoting for trans/ inter/ multidisciplinary collaborative education; integrating innovative method of teaching, sharing and facilitating right kind of information, are enhancing ways of quality of education during crisis (lock down) situation and further new-normal situation.

scholarly journals OpenUP’s Open Science Pilots. Designing innovative peer review and dissemination pilot studies

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Vignoli ◽  
Oliver Zendel ◽  
Matthias Schörghuber
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Fair Process ◽  
Constructive Feedback ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
Specific Implementation ◽  
The Impact

The review-disseminate-assess cycle is a multifaceted process involving different stakeholders: researchers, publishers, research institutions and funders, private companies, industry, and citizens. The H2020 project OpenUP aspires to bring all these stakeholders into an open dialogue to consensually identify and spread the review-disseminate-assess mechanisms advancing evolving practices of RRI in an Open Science context. OpenUP will actively engage research communities and implement a series of hands-on pilots to validate OpenUP’s proposed (open) peer review, innovative dissemination, and impact indicator frameworks. The pilots will be carried out in close cooperation with selected, devoted research communities from four scientific areas: arts and humanities, social sciences, life sciences, and energy. This poster visualises UpenUP’s pilot design exemplified by two of the seven Open Science Pilots to be conducted by the project: 1) Open Peer Review for Conferences, and 2) Addressing and Reaching Businesses and the Public with Research Output.The first pilot will evaluate the feasibility and acceptance of open peer reviewing in a conference setting. The specific implementation of the applied schema will be determined by the results from the state of the art study as well as the user questionnaire answers from other work packages of OpenUP. In comparison to the traditional way (double-blind evaluation of submitted papers by assigned reviewers chosen by the conference organisers) the new schema should allow for a more open and fair process as well as give additional incentives to reviewers. The actual pilot study will be conducted at a medium sized conference in consultation with the conference organisers. Follow-up questionnaires and interviews will show if the stakeholders preferred the new process and can provide constructive feedback for improvements and policy decisions.The second pilot will test existing and potential alternative forms, formats, and channels of open science communication, and explore how the targeted audiences, in particular businesses and the public, can be best reached via these channels. In a preparatory phase the team will map open science communication formats/channels and their targeted audiences. The team will conduct a workshop to elicit the targeted stakeholders’ requirements and expectations towards a useful and appealing communication of scientific contents. This will be the basis of the second pilot presented here. It will actively involve one or more energy research community projects beyond the OpenUP consortium. The goals are to test the previously established communication standards and channels for the energy area, and evaluate the impact and resonance at the targeted audiences.By actively involving research communities and other relevant stakeholders into the pilots, OpenUP will not only evaluate the practicability of the identified open peer review, innovative dissemination, and impact measurement methods in particular settings. It also intends to create and disseminate success stories, best/good practices, and policy recommendations, which will help further communities to implement working Open Science approaches in their research evaluation and communication strategies.

scholarly journals Between the traditional, the neo-liberal and the open university Early career investigators caught in the triple bind of academic career requirements

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Vanholsbeeck
Keyword(s):  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Academic Career ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Academic Excellence ◽  
Open University ◽  
Building Information ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Impact

Literature shows that, facing the neo-liberal definition of academic excellence, early career investigators (ECIs) in the social sciences and the humanities (SSH) have developed particular professional identities and behaviours towards the requirements of the academic career. Specificities of the SSH make the compliance to the assessment procedures of the “neo-liberal university” particularly challenging. Furthermore ECIs in the SSH are caught in an unprecedented “triple bind”. While pursuing their post-doctoral career in the context of the neo-liberal university, they are still academically trained in the disciplinary and collegial values of the “traditional university”. Although most career rewards and evaluation criteria are bound to the neo-liberal university, researchers now in the early stages of their career also constitute the first generation of academics to be exposed to the new requirements of the “open university”, through the Open Science policies and the Impact Agenda. In such context of uncertainty and conflicting rationalities, more efficient “early career building information ecosystems” should be put in place within academia. We also recommend to better integrate ECIs in the design and implementation of research evaluation principles and processes.

Open Science in Education Sciences

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilhelmina van Dijk ◽  
Chris Schatschneider ◽  
Sara Ann Hart
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Critical Elements ◽  
Rigorous Research ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Education Science ◽  
Science Movement

The Open Science movement has gained considerable traction in the last decade. The Open Science movement tries to increase trust in research results and open the access to all elements of a research project to the public. Central to these goals, Open Science has promoted four critical elements: Open Data, Open Analysis, Preregistration, and Open Access. All Open Science elements can be thought of as extensions to the traditional way of achieving openness in science, which has been scientific publication of research outcomes in journals or books. Open Science in Education Sciences, however, has the potential to be much more than a safeguard against questionable research. Open Science in Education Science provides opportunities to (a) increase the transparency and therefore replicability of research, and (b) develop and answer research questions about individuals with learning disabilities and learning difficulties that were previously impossible to answer due to complexities in data analysis methods. We will provide overviews of the main tenets of Open Science (i.e., Open Data, Open Analysis, Preregistration, and Open Access), show how they are in line with grant funding agencies’ expectations for rigorous research processes, and present resources on best practices for each of the tenets.

scholarly journals Open Science in Education Sciences

2020 ◽  
pp. 002221942094526
Author(s):  
Wilhelmina van Dijk ◽  
Christopher Schatschneider ◽  
Sara A. Hart
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rigorous Research ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Education Science ◽  
Science Movement ◽  
Open Materials

The Open Science movement has gained considerable traction in the last decade. The Open Science movement tries to increase trust in research results and open the access to all elements of a research project to the public. Central to these goals, Open Science has promoted five critical tenets: Open Data, Open Analysis, Open Materials, Preregistration, and Open Access. All Open Science elements can be thought of as extensions to the traditional way of achieving openness in science, which has been scientific publication of research outcomes in journals or books. Open Science in education sciences, however, has the potential to be much more than a safeguard against questionable research. Open Science in education science provides opportunities to (a) increase the transparency and therefore replicability of research and (b) develop and answer research questions about individuals with learning disabilities and learning difficulties that were previously impossible to answer due to complexities in data analysis methods. We will provide overviews of the main tenets of Open Science (i.e., Open Data, Open Analysis, Open Materials, Preregistration, and Open Access), show how they are in line with grant funding agencies’ expectations for rigorous research processes, and present resources on best practices for each of the tenets.

scholarly journals China’s SCI-Indexed Publications: Facts, Feelings, and Future Directions

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 562-569 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weishu Liu
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation System ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
The Past ◽  
Opinion Piece ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Research Evaluation System ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Science Citation Index Expanded

Purpose: In relation to the boom in China’s SCI-indexed publications, this opinion piece examines this phenomenon and looks at future possible directions for the reform of China’s research evaluation processes. Design/Approach/Methods: This opinion piece uses bibliographic data for the past decade (2010–2019) from the Science Citation Index Expanded in the Web of Science Core Collection to examine the rise in China’s SCI-indexed publications. Findings: China has surpassed the U.S. and been the largest contributor of SCI publications since 2018. However, while the impact of China’s SCI publications is rising, the scale of this impact still lags behind that of other major contributing countries. China’s SCI publications are also overrepresented in some journals. Originality/Value: Reporting the latest facts about China’s SCI-indexed publications, this article will benefit the reform of China’s research evaluation system.

scholarly journals Do City Honors Increase Tourism Economic Growth? A Quasi-Natural Experimental Research Study Based on “Civilized City” Selection in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (22) ◽  
pp. 12545
Author(s):  
Qiao Chen ◽  
Yan Mao
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Natural Experiment ◽  
Research Study ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Growth And Yield ◽  
Institutional Supply ◽  
Tourism Economy ◽  
The Impact ◽  
New Evidence

“Civilized City” is the highest honor in China’s urban evaluation system. This research used a quasi-natural experiment approach to evaluate how the “Civilized City” designation influence tourism economic growth. The results showed that: (1) “Civilized City” selection promotes the growth of the tourism economy, and its impact on tourism income is greater than on the number of tourists. The “Civilized City” award is more conducive to the growth of the tourism economy than other city honors; (2) the “Civilized City” honor promotes institutional supply and adjusts the allocation of capital and labor, thereby promoting the growth of the tourism economy; and (3) the analysis showed that the impact of the “Civilized City” honor on a city’s tourism economy varies according to region, administrative level, and population size. The results of this research provide empirical support that city honors boost tourism economy growth and yield new evidence for cities to promote tourism development through awards and accreditations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document