Early career researchers want Open Science

Farnham, Andrea; Kurz, Christoph; Öztürk, Mehmet Ali; Solbiati, Monica; Myllyntaus, Oona; Meekes, Jordy; Pham, Tra My; Paz, Clara; Langiewicz, Magda; Andrews, Sophie; Kanninen, Liisa; Agbemabiese, Chantal Ama; Güler, Arzu; Durieux, Jeffrey; Jasim, Sarah; Viessmann, Olivia; Frattini, S.; Yembergenova, Danagul; Benito, C. Marín; Porte, Marion; Grangeray-Vilmint, Anaïs; Curiel, Rafael Prieto; Rehncrona, Carin; Malas, Tareq B.; Esposito, Flavia; Hettne, Kristina

doi:10.1186/s13059-017-1351-7

Cited by 35 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been shown that there is a robust, statistically supported citation benefit from 'open data' in comparison to similar studies without publicly available data (Piwowar & Vision, 2013). This especially aids early career researchers, who are outsiders of the scientific establishment and likely experience more barriers to other aspects of open science (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018), yet are highly involved in data collection and analysis (Farnham et al, 2017).…”

Section: Benefits For Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reuse of public datasets in the life sciences: potential risks and rewards

Sielemann

Hafner

Pucker

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ‘big data’ revolution has enabled novel types of analyses in the life sciences, facilitated by public sharing and reuse of datasets. Here, we review the prodigious potential of reusing publicly available datasets and the associated challenges, limitations and risks. Possible solutions to issues and research integrity considerations are also discussed. Due to the prominence, abundance and wide distribution of sequencing data, we focus on the reuse of publicly available sequence datasets. We define ‘successful reuse’ as the use of previously published data to enable novel scientific findings. By using selected examples of successful reuse from different disciplines, we illustrate the enormous potential of the practice, while acknowledging the respective limitations and risks. A checklist to determine the reuse value and potential of a particular dataset is also provided. The open discussion of data reuse and the establishment of this practice as a norm has the potential to benefit all stakeholders in the life sciences.

show abstract

Section: Benefits For Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reuse of public datasets in the life sciences: potential risks and rewards

Sielemann

Hafner

Pucker

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years, the Open Science movement has prompted a discipline-wide reappraisal of the reproducibility, replicability, and robustness of psychological science (Nosek et al, 2015;Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Although uptake of Open Science methods throughout psychology has been slow (Norris & O'Connor, 2019), many Early Career Researchers (ECRs) have responded to this changing landscape with enthusiasm and innovation (Bartlett & Eaves, 2019;Farnham et al, 2017;Hobson, 2019;Orben, 2019). Here, we define Open Science as both the commitment of incorporating transparency in all aspects of the research process, and a fundamental approach to research which aims to clear science of its ideological biases.…”

Section: Navigating Open Science As Early Career Feminist Researchersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

Pownall¹,

Talbot²,

Henschel³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Except for some data journals, and more recently software journals and for example videographic essay journals, at the moment, still most publishers do not publish publications other than peer reviewed articles. The consequences are that it is impossible or at least very difficult for an academic to receive credits for the merits of their other types of works (Farnham et al, 2017;McKiernan et al, 2016; Working Group on Rewards Under Open Science, 2017; Wouters et al, 2019).…”

Section: Hampering Open Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

UNIVERSITY JOURNALS. Consolidating institutional repositories in a digital, free, open access publication platform for <i>all</i> scholarly output

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Funders increasingly mandate researchers to publish their scientific articles in open access and to retain their copyright. Universities all over the world have set up institutional repositories and use repositories for the preservation and dissemination of academic production of their institutions, including scientific articles, reports, datasets, and other research outputs. However, in general, authors do not find institutional repositories very attractive and accessible as an open access publication platform since repositories and open access are not part of the rewarding system. We expect that researchers are more likely to publish and deposit their scientific papers in a repository, once they have the appearance, recognition and dissemination of a scientific journal. That is why we took the initiative to set up a repository based journal 'University Journals' in which universities collaborate. The paper will explain the University Journals project and how the involved universities want to facilitate a valuable alternative publication platform that complies with Plan S principles and enables publication and dissemination of all research outcomes. By establishing University Journals as a publication platform, university libraries are instrumental (and crucial) in achieving the ambitions of Open Science, and universities gain control over the publication process.

show abstract

Early career researchers want Open Science

Cited by 35 publications

References 5 publications

The reuse of public datasets in the life sciences: potential risks and rewards

The reuse of public datasets in the life sciences: potential risks and rewards

Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

UNIVERSITY JOURNALS. Consolidating institutional repositories in a digital, free, open access publication platform for <i>all</i> scholarly output

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About