From Old School to Open Science: The Implications of New Research Norms for Educational Psychology and Beyond

Authors : Hunter Gehlbach, Carly Robinson

Recently, scholars have noted how several “old school” practices—a host of well-regarded, long-standing scientific norms—in combination, sometimes compromise the credibility of research.

In response, other scholarly fields have developed several “open science” norms and practices to address these credibility issues. Against this backdrop, this special issue explores the extent to which and how these norms should be adopted and adapted for educational psychology and education more broadly.

Our introductory article contextualizes the special issue’s goals by: overviewing the historical context that led to open science norms (particularly in medicine and psychology); providing a conceptual map to illustrate the interrelationships between various old school as well as open science practices; and then describing educational psychologists’ opportunity to benefit from and contribute to the translation of these norms to novel research contexts.

We conclude by previewing the articles in the special issue.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/za7p5

A survey of researchers’ needs and priorities for data sharing

Authors : Iain Hrynaszkiewicz, James Harney, Lauren Cadwallader

PLOS has long supported Open Science. One of the ways in which we do so is via our stringent data availability policy established in 2014. Despite this policy, and more data sharing policies being introduced by other organizations, best practices for data sharing are adopted by a minority of researchers in their publications. Problems with effective research data sharing persist and these problems have been quantified by previous research as a lack of time, resources, incentives, and/or skills to share data.

In this study we built on this research by investigating the importance of tasks associated with data sharing, and researchers’ satisfaction with their ability to complete these tasks. By investigating these factors we aimed to better understand opportunities for new or improved solutions for sharing data.

In May-June 2020 we surveyed researchers from Europe and North America to rate tasks associated with data sharing on (i) their importance and (ii) their satisfaction with their ability to complete them. We received 728 completed and 667 partial responses. We calculated mean importance and satisfaction scores to highlight potential opportunities for new solutions to and compare different cohorts.

Tasks relating to research impact, funder compliance, and credit had the highest importance scores. 52% of respondents reuse research data but the average satisfaction score for obtaining data for reuse was relatively low. Tasks associated with sharing data were rated somewhat important and respondents were reasonably well satisfied in their ability to accomplish them. Notably, this included tasks associated with best data sharing practice, such as use of data repositories. However, the most common method for sharing data was in fact via supplemental files with articles, which is not considered to be best practice.

We presume that researchers are unlikely to seek new solutions to a problem or task that they are satisfied in their ability to accomplish, even if many do not attempt this task. This implies there are few opportunities for new solutions or tools to meet these researcher needs. Publishers can likely meet these needs for data sharing by working to seamlessly integrate existing solutions that reduce the effort or behaviour change involved in some tasks, and focusing on advocacy and education around the benefits of sharing data.

There may however be opportunities – unmet researcher needs – in relation to better supporting data reuse, which could be met in part by strengthening data sharing policies of journals and publishers, and improving the discoverability of data associated with published articles.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/njr5u

Ouverture des données de recherche dans le domaine académique suisse : outils pour le choix d’une stratégie institutionnelle en matière de dépôt de données

Auteur/Author : Marielle Guirlet

Le contexte actuel de l’Open Science se traduit par des exigences d’ouverture des données de recherche. Le dépôt de données est un instrument crucial pour partager publiquement ces données.

Néanmoins, l’offre actuelle pléthorique et très diverse rend la sélection du dépôt difficile pour les chercheurs et les chercheuses. Pour les aider, leurs institutions d’affiliation émettent des recommandations pour le choix du meilleur dépôt. Elles proposent parfois aussi leur propre dépôt de données ou envisagent de le créer.

Cette étude, basée sur un travail de Master en sciences de l’information, s’intéresse à la démarche que les institutions académiques suisses peuvent suivre pour définir leur stratégie de soutien aux chercheurs et aux chercheuses en termes de dépôt.

Elle identifie aussi les informations qui vont aider ces institutions à choisir entre orienter ces chercheurs et ces chercheuses vers un dépôt existant (et lequel) et créer un nouveau dépôt, et aux spécifications que ce dépôt doit remplir.

Après avoir défini les concepts des données de recherche et des dépôts ouverts, les fonctionnalités, les outils et les services nécessaires à un dépôt pour mettre en œuvre le partage public de données sont discutés.

A partir des critères utilisés par la certification CoreTrustSeal pour évaluer la qualité d’un dépôt, et en tenant compte de ces fonctionnalités, de ces outils et ces services, un modèle de description d’un dépôt de données de recherche ouvertes est élaboré. Ce modèle peut être utilisé pour l’évaluation d’un dépôt existant ou pour la conception d’un nouveau dépôt.

Les stratégies de neuf institutions académiques suisses en matière de dépôt de données de recherche, dépôts utilisés et dépôts recommandés, sont analysées. Des recommandations sont formulées, sur la base des bonnes pratiques observées.

Des outils développés pour le choix de la meilleure stratégie en termes de dépôt de données de recherche ouvertes sont alors présentés. Un vade-mecum se présentant comme une liste de questions permet de collecter certaines informations utiles.

Un guide décisionnel accompagne l’institution dans sa réflexion et lui permet de choisir sa stratégie de façon éclairée, avec les informations collectées précédemment. Une fois cette stratégie choisie, des informations complémentaires et des recommandations sont disponibles pour sa mise en pratique.

Une version prototype de ces outils pour navigateur Internet est aussi présentée. Elle est adaptable à une évolution du contexte et transposable à d’autres pays.

URL : http://www.ressi.ch/num21/article182

Preprints in Chemistry: An Exploratory Analysis of Differences with Journal Articles

Author : Mario Pagliaro

The exploratory analysis of the differences between preprints and the corresponding peer reviewed journal articles for ten studies first published on ChemRxiv and on Preprints, though statistically non-significant, suggests outcomes of relevance for chemistry researchers and educators.

The full transition to open science requires new education of doctoral students and young researchers on scholarly communication in the digital age.

The preliminary findings of this study will contribute to inform the curriculum of the aforementioned new courses for young chemists, eventually promoting accelerated innovation in a science that, unique amid all basic sciences, originates a huge industry central to the wealth of nations.

URL : Preprints in Chemistry: An Exploratory Analysis of Differences with Journal Articles

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010005

Opening up the Library: Transforming our Policies, Practices and Structures

Authors : Joanna Ball, Graham Stone, Sarah Thompson

Momentum is building in the transition to open access for monographs, with a number of funders developing policies and mandates in recent years.

The article argues that while libraries play an instrumental role in driving a transition to open science within their institutions this is not reflected in libraries’ approaches to collection development, which are still predicated on purchased content.

Libraries are keen to demonstrate that their purchased content is relevant to users, often promoting ‘expensive’ purchased collections over open content. Rather than relegating open to a less-visible second place, the article calls for libraries to acquire and promote open content alongside, and where appropriate with higher priority, than paid-for content.

In order to facilitate a transition to open access for monographs, cultural change and leadership is required within libraries to reimagine themselves around open content as the norm, with policies, practices and structures that communicate, enable and promote this shift. The article calls for a collaborative international approach.

URL : Opening up the Library: Transforming our Policies, Practices and Structures

Original location : https://www.liberquarterly.eu/article/10.18352/lq.10360/

Which aspects of the Open Science agenda are most relevant to scientometric research and publishing? An opinion paper

Authors : Lutz Bornmann, Raf Guns, Michael Thelwall, Dietmar Wolfram

Open Science is an umbrella term that encompasses many recommendations for possible changes in research practices, management, and publishing with the objective to increase transparency and accessibility.

This has become an important science policy issue that all disciplines should consider. Many Open Science recommendations may be valuable for the further development of research and publishing but not all are relevant to all fields.

This opinion paper considers the aspects of Open Science that are most relevant for scientometricians, discussing how they can be usefully applied.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_e_00121

Preprints: Their Evolving Role in Science Communication

Authors : Iratxe Puebla, Jessica Polka, Oya Rieger

The use of preprints for the dissemination of research in some life sciences branches has increased substantially over the last few years. In this document, we discuss preprint publishing and use in the life sciences, from initial experiments back in the 1960s to the current landscape.

We explore the perspectives, advantages and perceived concerns that different stakeholders associate with preprints, and where preprints stand in the context of research assessment frameworks.

We also discuss the role of preprints in the publishing ecosystem and within open science more broadly, before outlining some remaining open questions and considerations for the future evolution of preprints.

URL : Preprints: Their Evolving Role in Science Communication

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/ezfsk