Open Science in Practice: Researcher Perspectives and Participation
Open Science in Practice: Researcher Perspectives and Participation
复制标题
实践中的开放科学：研究人员的观点和参与
DOI：
10.2218/ijdc.v6i1.182
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Graham Pryor
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Whyte;Graham Pryor
我们报告了一项探索性研究，包括选定学科中的简短案例研究，检查是什么促使研究人员在他们的数据、结果和方案方面以开放的方式工作(或想要工作)，以及以这种方式工作是否会带来优势。我们回顾了开放科学的政策背景，以及关于开放数据带来的好处的文献，考虑了这些与管理和谁参与科学的问题的关系。案例研究调查了利用开放的科学方法给研究人员、研究机构和资助机构带来的预期好处、阻碍和障碍，以及支持这些看法的证据的程度。选择了天文学、生物信息学、化学、流行病学、语言技术和神经影像等六个案例研究小组。这些研究通过对访谈记录的定性分析，找出了相关的例子和问题。我们提供了整个研究生命周期开放工作程度的类型学，并得出结论，需要通过指导方针更好地支持开放工作，以协助研究小组确定更开放工作的价值和成本，并进行进一步研究，以评估开放研究过程所带来的风险、激励和责任转移。
We report on an exploratory study consisting of brief case studies in selected disciplines, examining what motivates researchers to work (or want to work) in an open manner with regard to their data, results and protocols, and whether advantages are delivered by working in this way. We review the policy background to open science, and literature on the benefits attributed to open data, considering how these relate to curation and to questions of who participates in science. The case studies investigate the perceived benefits to researchers, research institutions and funding bodies of utilising open scientific methods, the disincentives and barriers, and the degree to which there is evidence to support these perceptions. Six case study groups were selected in astronomy, bioinformatics, chemistry, epidemiology, language technology and neuroimaging. The studies identify relevant examples and issues through qualitative analysis of interview transcripts. We provide a typology of degrees of open working across the research lifecycle, and conclude that better support for open working, through guidelines to assist research groups in identifying the value and costs of working more openly, and further research to assess the risks, incentives and shifts in responsibility entailed by opening up the research process are needed.