Archives des catégories : EN

Reproducible and Attributable Materials Science Curation Practices: A Case Study

Posté le par

Authors : Ye Li, Sarah Laura Wilson, Micah Altman

While small labs produce much of the fundamental experimental research in Material Science and Engineering (MSE), little is known about their data management and sharing practices and the extent to which they promote trust in, and transparency of, the published research.

In this research, we conduct a case study of a leading MSE research lab to characterize the limits of current data management and sharing practices concerning reproducibility and attribution. We systematically reconstruct the workflows, underpinning four research projects by combining interviews, document review, and digital forensics. We then apply information graph analysis and computer-assisted retrospective auditing to identify where critical research information is unavailable or at risk.

We find that while data management and sharing practices in this leading lab protect against computer and disk failure, they are insufficient to ensure reproducibility or correct attribution of work — especially when a group member withdraws before project completion.

We conclude with recommendations for adjustments to MSE data management and sharing practices to promote trustworthiness and transparency by adding lightweight automated file-level auditing and automated data transfer processes.

URL : Reproducible and Attributable Materials Science Curation Practices: A Case Study

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v18i1.940

The role of non-scientific factors vis-à-vis the quality of publications in determining their scholarly impact

Posté le par

Authors : Giovanni Abramo, Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, Leonardo Grilli

In the evaluation of scientific publications’ impact, the interplay between intrinsic quality and non-scientific factors remains a subject of debate. While peer review traditionally assesses quality, bibliometric techniques gauge scholarly impact.

This study investigates the role of non-scientific attributes alongside quality scores from peer review in determining scholarly impact. Leveraging data from the first Italian Research Assessment Exercise (VTR 2001–2003) and Web of Science citations, we analyse the relationship between quality scores, non-scientific factors, and publication short- and long-term impact.

Our findings shed light on the significance of non-scientific elements overlooked in peer review, offering policymakers and research management insights in choosing evaluation methodologies. Sections delve into the debate, identify non-scientific influences, detail methodologies, present results, and discuss implications.

URL : The role of non-scientific factors vis-à-vis the quality of publications in determining their scholarly impact

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05106-z

Practices and Attitudes of the Research and Teaching Staff at the University of Split about the Online Encyclopedia Wikipedia

Posté le par

Author : Mirko Duić

The goal of this study was to investigate the practices and attitudes of the research and teaching staff at the University of Split (Croatia) about the online encyclopedia Wikipedia. The method of a questionnaire-based survey was used to gain insights related to this topic. During February 2024, the survey was completed by 226 respondents.

The results show that almost all respondents read Wikipedia articles and believe that the level of their accuracy is quite high. Almost half of the respondents strongly agree with the statement that it would be desirable for faculty staff to write Wikipedia articles with the aim of spreading knowledge about topics from their professional fields.

However, a very small number of respondents participated in writing articles for Wikipedia. Also, the respondents answered that to them, the greatest motivations to write articles on Wikipedia would be if this activity were evaluated for the advancement to a higher work position and the correction of errors in Wikipedia articles.

It was also found that most respondents are not very familiar with how Wikipedia works or how to add new content to it. These and other insights from this study can be used to conceive and initiate various activities that can contribute to greater participation of scientific and teaching staff of higher education institutions in writing quality content on Wikipedia, as well as activities that can contribute to a better familiarization with the principles and procedures to write and enhance its content.

Other research methods, such as interviews with scientific and teaching staff of higher education institutions, could be used to acquire further, more detailed answers related to this topic.

URL : Practices and Attitudes of the Research and Teaching Staff at the University of Split about the Online Encyclopedia Wikipedia

Original location : https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/3/20

The promotion and implementation of open science measures among high-performing journals from Brazil, Mexico, Portugal, and Spain

Posté le par

Authors : Chris Fradkin, Rogério Mugnaini

This study empirically examined the promotion and implementation of open science measures among high-performing journals of Brazil, Mexico, Portugal, and Spain. Journal policy related to data sharing, materials sharing, preregistration, open peer review, and consideration of preprints and replication studies was gathered from the websites of the journals.

Four hundred articles were coded for the inclusion of data availability statements, conflict of interest disclosures, funding disclosures, DOI, ORCID, and continuous publishing. Analyses found a higher promotion of open science measures among Brazilian journals than their Portuguese counterparts, and higher promotion of open science measures among international journals than their domestic counterparts.

Analyses found higher implementation of open science measures among Brazilian journals than their Portuguese and Mexican counterparts. One journal out of 40 encouraged preregistration of studies; none encouraged replication studies and none had implemented open peer review.

These findings reveal reasonably strong implementation of secondary open science measures (e.g., DOI, ORCID, conflict of interest and funding source disclosure) among the sample, but weaker implementation of primary measures (e.g., open data, open materials, replication studies and open peer review).

The implications of these findings are considered and suggestions are made to bolster the adoption of open science measures among Ibero-American scientific journals.

URL : The promotion and implementation of open science measures among high-performing journals from Brazil, Mexico, Portugal, and Spain

Why academics under-share research data: A social relational theory

Posté le par

Authors : Janice Bially Mattern, Joseph Kohlburn, Heather Moulaison-Sandy

Despite their professed enthusiasm for open science, faculty researchers have been documented as not freely sharing their data; instead, if sharing data at all, they take a minimal approach. A robust research agenda in LIS has documented the data under-sharing practices in which they engage, and the motivations they profess.

Using theoretical frameworks from sociology to complement research in LIS, this article examines the broader context in which researchers are situated, theorizing the social relational dynamics in academia that influence faculty decisions and practices relating to data sharing.

We advance a theory that suggests that the academy has entered a period of transition, and faculty resistance to data sharing through foot-dragging is one response to shifting power dynamics. If the theory is borne out empirically, proponents of open access will need to find a way to encourage open academic research practices without undermining the social value of academic researchers.

URL : Why academics under-share research data: A social relational theory

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24938

The societal impact of Open Science: a scoping review

Posté le par

Authors : Nicki Lisa Cole, Eva Kormann, Thomas Klebel, Simon Apartis, Tony Ross-Hellauer

Open Science (OS) aims, in part, to drive greater societal impact of academic research. Government, funder and institutional policies state that it should further democratize research and increase learning and awareness, evidence-based policy-making, the relevance of research to society’s problems, and public trust in research. Yet, measuring the societal impact of OS has proven challenging and synthesized evidence of it is lacking.

This study fills this gap by systematically scoping the existing evidence of societal impact driven by OS and its various aspects, including Citizen Science (CS), Open Access (OA), Open/FAIR Data (OFD), Open Code/Software and others. Using the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews and searches conducted in Web of Science, Scopus and relevant grey literature, we identified 196 studies that contain evidence of societal impact. The majority concern CS, with some focused on OA, and only a few addressing other aspects.

Key areas of impact found are education and awareness, climate and environment, and social engagement. We found no literature documenting evidence of the societal impact of OFD and limited evidence of societal impact in terms of policy, health, and trust in academic research. Our findings demonstrate a critical need for additional evidence and suggest practical and policy implications.

URL : https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240286

The oligopoly of academic publishers persists in exclusive database

Posté le par

Authors : Simon van Bellen, Juan Pablo Alperin, Vincent Larivière

Global scholarly publishing has been dominated by a small number of publishers for several decades. We aimed to revisit the debate on corporate control of scholarly publishing by analyzing the relative shares of major publishers and smaller, independent publishers. Using the Web of Science, Dimensions and OpenAlex, we managed to retrieve twice as many articles indexed in Dimensions and OpenAlex, compared to the rather selective Web of Science.

As a result of excluding smaller publishers, the ‘oligopoly’ of scholarly publishers persists, at least in appearance, according to the Web of Science. However, both Dimensions’ and OpenAlex’ inclusive indexing revealed the share of smaller publishers has been growing rapidly, especially since the onset of large-scale online publishing around 2000, resulting in a current cumulative dominance of smaller publishers.

While the expansion of small publishers was most pronounced in the social sciences and humanities, the natural and medical sciences showed a similar trend. A major geographical divergence is also revealed, with some countries, mostly Anglo-Saxon and/or located in northwestern Europe, relying heavily on major publishers for the dissemination of their research, while others being relatively independent of the oligopoly, such as those in Latin America, northern Africa, eastern Europe and parts of Asia.

The emergence of digital publishing, the reduction of expenses for printing and distribution and open-source journal management tools may have contributed to the emergence of small publishers, while the development of inclusive bibliometric databases has allowed for the effective indexing of journals and articles. We conclude that enhanced visibility to recently created, independent journals may favour their growth and stimulate global scholarly bibliodiversity.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.17893