Introducing a data availability policy for journals at IOP Publishing: Measuring the impact on authors and editorial teams

Authors : Jade Holt, Andrew Walker, Phill Jones

As the open research movement continues to gather pace, a number of publishers, funders, and institutions are mandating the sharing of underlying research data. At the same time, concerns about introducing extra quality control steps around data availability statements (DAS) are driving a discussion about the best way to make data more open without slowing down publication.

This article describes a pilot project to introduce a new Open Data policy to three IOP Publishing (IOPP) journals as part of IOPP’s commitment to increasing transparency and support for open science.

An investigation was undertaken using an automated workflow monitoring tool to understand the impact of this change on authors and the editorial staff. Changes in revised submission processing times and how often manuscripts were returned to the author were measured.

An overall increase in the time editorial staff spent processing manuscripts was found as well as an increase in the number of times manuscripts were returned to authors. Detailed analysis shows that manuscripts in which authors claim in the DAS to have included data within the manuscript were the most strongly affected. Steps to mitigate the effects through improved author communication were found to be effective.

URL : Introducing a data availability policy for journals at IOP Publishing: Measuring the impact on authors and editorial teams

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1386

Open science, the replication crisis, and environmental public health

Author : Daniel J. Hicks

Concerns about a crisis of mass irreplicability across scientific fields (“the replication crisis”) have stimulated a movement for open science, encouraging or even requiring researchers to publish their raw data and analysis code.

Recently, a rule at the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) would have imposed a strong open data requirement. The rule prompted significant public discussion about whether open science practices are appropriate for fields of environmental public health.

The aims of this paper are to assess (1) whether the replication crisis extends to fields of environmental public health; and (2) in general whether open science requirements can address the replication crisis.

There is little empirical evidence for or against mass irreplicability in environmental public health specifically. Without such evidence, strong claims about whether the replication crisis extends to environmental public health – or not – seem premature.

By distinguishing three concepts – reproducibility, replicability, and robustness – it is clear that open data initiatives can promote reproducibility and robustness but do little to promote replicability.

I conclude by reviewing some of the other benefits of open science, and offer some suggestions for funding streams to mitigate the costs of adoption of open science practices in environmental public health.

URL : Open science, the replication crisis, and environmental public health

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2021.1962713

Integrating Qualitative Methods and Open Science: Five Principles for More Trustworthy Research

Authors : Lee Humphreys, Neil A Lewis Jr, Katherine Sender, Andrea Stevenson Won

Recent initiatives toward open science in communication have prompted vigorous debate. In this article, we draw on qualitative and interpretive research methods to expand the key priorities that the open science framework addresses, namely producing trustworthy and quality research.

This article contributes to communication research by integrating qualitative methodological literature with open communication science research to identify five broader commitments for all communication research: validity, transparency, ethics, reflexivity, and collaboration.

We identify key opportunities where qualitative and quantitative communication scholars can leverage the momentum of open science to critically reflect on and improve our knowledge production processes.

We also examine competing values that incentivize dubious practices in communication research, and discuss several metascience initiatives to enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field and value multiple ways of knowing.

URL : Integrating Qualitative Methods and Open Science: Five Principles for More Trustworthy Research

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqab026

Yes! We’re open. Open science and the future of academic practices in translation and interpreting studies

Author : Christian Olalla-Soler

This article offers an overview of open science and open-science practices and their applications to translation and interpreting studies (TIS).

Publications on open science in different disciplines were reviewed in order to define open science, identify academic publishing practices emerging from the core features of open science, and discuss the limitations of such practices in the humanities and the social sciences.

The compiled information was then contextualised within TIS academic publishing practices based on bibliographic and bibliometric data. The results helped to identify what open-science practices have been adopted in TIS, what problems emerge from applying some of these practices, and in what ways such practices could be fostered in our discipline.

This article aims to foster a debate on the future of TIS publishing and the role that open science will play in the discipline in the upcoming years.

URL : Yes! We’re open. Open science and the future of academic practices in translation and interpreting studies

Original location : http://trans-int.org/index.php/transint/article/view/1317

Comment sauver l’ouverture de la science ? l’évaluation

Auteur/Author : Denis Jerome

Les mondes de la recherche et celui des éditeurs encouragent une disponibilité des résultats de la recherche à tous et gratuitement. La transition vers une science ouverte se développe rapidement mais elle n’est pas sans poser de sérieux problèmes qui ne sont pas uniquement d’ordre budgétaire mais peuvent aussi porter atteinte à l’éthique et au bon fonctionnement de la recherche.

Les acteurs incontournables que sont les chercheurs individuellement ou via les sociétés savantes et les académies doivent reprendre le contrôle de cette transition en reconsidérant le rôle de l’évaluation qui est le nœud du problème. C’est la pratique de l’évaluation qu’il faut revoir.

URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03291013

Total SciComm: A Strategy for Communicating Open Science

Authors : Manh-Toan Ho, Manh-Tung Ho, Quan-Hoang Vuong

This paper seeks to introduce a strategy of science communication: Total SciComm or all-out science communication. We proposed that to maximize the outreach and impact, scientists should use different media to communicate different aspects of science, from core ideas to methods.

The paper uses an example of a debate surrounding a now-retracted article in the Nature journal, in which open data, preprints, social media, and blogs are being used for a meaningful scientific conversation.

The case embodied the central idea of Total SciComm: the scientific community employs every medium to communicate scientific ideas and engages all scientists in the process.

URL : Total SciComm: A Strategy for Communicating Open Science

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9030031

Le partage des données vu par les chercheurs : une approche par la valeur

Auteur/Author : Violaine Rebouillat

Le propos de cet article porte sur la compréhension des logiques qui interviennent dans la définition de la valeur des données de la recherche, celles-ci pouvant avoir une influence sur les critères déterminant leur motivation au partage.

L’approche méthodologique repose sur une enquête qualitative, menée dans le cadre d’une recherche doctorale, qui a déployé 57 entretiens semi-directifs. Alors que les travaux menés autour des données sont focalisés sur les freins et motivations du partage, l’originalité de cette recherche consiste à identifier les différents prismes par lesquels la question de la valeur des données impacte la motivation et la décision de leur partage.

L’analyse des résultats montre que, tous domaines confondus, la valeur des données reste encore cristallisée autour de la publication et de la reconnaissance symbolique du travail du chercheur.

Les résultats permettent de comprendre que la question du partage est confrontée à un impensé : celui du cadre actuel de l’évaluation de la recherche, qui met l’article scientifique au cœur de son dispositif.

Ce travail contribue donc à montrer que l’avenir du partage des données dépend des systèmes alternatifs futurs d’évaluation de la recherche, associés à la science ouverte.

URL : https://lesenjeux.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/2021/varia/03-le-partage-des-donnees-vu-par-les-chercheurs-une-approche-par-la-valeur/