Model proposal of libraries functions to implement open science: Analysis from Latin American librarianship

Author : Juan Miguel Palma Peña

Libraries and open science are linked by common objectives, owing to libraries being actors that develop free access to information for many, and open science is an action that encourages free circulation of data and research outputs. Therefore both the actor and the action contribute to the satisfaction of information needs.

The aim of this research is to analyze the actions that governments, universities and libraries have carried out to implement open science in Latin America, based on the analysis of factors and library functions. The methodology of this research comprised a bibliographic review and quantitative methods.

For the exploratory analysis, the main sources for retrieval information were the official web portals of universities and library entities, the State of Open Data Policy Repository, the Registry of Research Data and the Dataverse Project. A general conclusion is that academic libraries are actors and laboratories with elements to support the implementation of open science.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352241276838

Economic valuation of open research data: A conceptual framework and methodological approach

Authors : Zhifang Tu, Jiashu Shen

The economic significance of open research data is widely acknowledged, yet its quantification remains challenging. This paper presents an effective valuation instrument to help stakeholders understand and evaluate the economic benefits of open research data. By conducting a scoping review and prioritizing user engagement, this study introduces a comprehensive conceptual framework for the economic valuation of open research data. The valuation is based on economic value and willingness to pay, employing the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM).

It incorporates per-use models (view, download, and request) and periodic subscription models (monthly and yearly). An empirical survey was conducted at the National Basic Science Data Center (NBSDC) in China to verify this framework. Both pricing models, comprising five distinct tactics, was supported by surveyed users. Measuring economic value by views and by year was preferred, while willingness to pay by downloads and by year was considered more reasonable.

Overall, the most applicable valuation approach is on a yearly basis. Through this case study at NBSDC, specific pricing tactics were identified, and the total economic value and users’ willingness to pay were assessed. This study is arguably the first to establish a conceptual framework with pricing tactics from a user perspective. This methodological approach for economic valuation of open research data provides evidence and tools for future research, policy formulation, and resource allocation in the context of open science and innovation.

URL : Economic valuation of open research data: A conceptual framework and methodological approach

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvae033

The Living Library: a process-based tool for open literature review, probing the boundaries of open science

Authors : Elisabeth Angerer, Maura Cassidy Burke, Simon Dirks, Arthur Bakker, Aitana Bilinski Torres, Toine Pieters

The Living Library is a novel tool for opening the scientific process of literature reviewing. We here present its core features, set-up and workflow, and provide the open-source code via GitHub (https://github.com/Simon-Dirks/living-library). The Living Library allows researchers to sort articles thematically and temporally, has a built-in open logbook, and uses a responsive methodology.

These core features render the Living Library both a practical tool, and an educative framework for reflection on the research process. Its use deepened our understanding of what it means and what it takes to open science, which we summarise in three main lessons: openness is multidirectional, involving sharing and receiving; openness is relational and as such requires boundary work; and openness entails judgments of relevance.

This highlights the intimate connection between research relevance and open science: Opening science is no categorical practice, but the continuous syncing to a world in motion—opening up for it and to it, to varying degrees at different boundaries, in response to what is happening and what matters.

The Living Library models what such syncing can look like in relation to the evolving academic conversation. We encourage further experimentation with the Living Library to probe the boundaries of open science.

URL : The Living Library: a process-based tool for open literature review, probing the boundaries of open science

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-024-00964-z

La valorisation de HAL. Finalités, outils et process

Auteur.ices/Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Hélène Prost, Bernard Jacquemin, Éric Kergosien, Florence Thiault

L’article présente les résultats d’une analyse qualitative de l’utilisation de la plateforme HAL par les laboratoires de recherche. L’analyse s’appuie sur des entretiens semi-directifs avec des représentants de 50 laboratoires affiliés aux dix universités de recherche Udice. Elle porte sur la fonction que remplit HAL pour les laboratoires, sur sa valeur ajoutée pour leur fonctionnement et leur développement.

En particulier, nous interrogeons les finalités de l’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires, le recours à des outils internes et externes, et les trajectoires des pratiques. Nous discutons les résultats sous trois angles : les discours et les communautés de pratiques dans les laboratoires ; le périmètre et les enjeux des dispositifs mis en place par les laboratoires en amont et en aval de HAL ; et la transformation de HAL d’une plateforme d’auto-archivage et de communication scientifique directe vers une infrastructure de suivi et d’évaluation de la performance scientifique. Il s’agit du premier d’une série de trois articles issus du projet HAL/LO.

URL : La valorisation de HAL. Finalités, outils et process

DOI : https://doi.org/10.46298/jdmdh.13051

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

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

Authors : Janice Bially MatternJoseph KohlburnHeather 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

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