Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Panorama Praktik Sains Terbuka

118 views

Published on

Paparan Dr. Juneman Abraham mengenai Sains Terbuka di LIPI (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia) - melengkapi paparan di bit.y/sainsterbuka dan bit.ly/aksesterbuka . Salindia ini dapat diakses juga melalui bit.ly/sainsterbukalipi

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Panorama Praktik Sains Terbuka

  1. 1. Panorama Praktik Sains Terbuka Dr. Juneman Abraham, S.Psi. http://about.me/juneman
  2. 2. Materials http://bit.ly/sainsterbuka http://bit.ly/aksesterbuka
  3. 3. Nilai Kepercayaan • Apa yang membuat sebuah karya ilmiah dapat dipercaya (trustworthy, credible, believable)?
  4. 4. • Why was the study undertaken? -> generate income, lobby for a policy change, evaluate the impact of a programme or develop a new theoretical framework? • Who conducted the study? -> expertise • Who funded the research? -> third party interest • How was the data collected? -> representative or generalisable? clear procedure? • Is the sample size and response rate sufficient? • Does the research make use of secondary data? -> reflecting on how credible the data source is, and how usable it is. • Does the research measure what it claims to measure? -> validity issue. • Can the findings be generalised to my situation, institution or country? -> Western, educated, and from industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) countries Bryman, A., Social Research Methods 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2012.
  5. 5. Apakah Open Science itu? Kognitif Afektif Konatif Adil
  6. 6. A bit history
  7. 7. https://canterbury.libguides.com/sharepublish/openaccess
  8. 8. https://www.scienceopen.com/document/review?review=6a6d5dfb-6902-4dfa-903c- 57fcec3e74ae&vid=e0b58e80-98ea-42f5-a07d-da44aa1795b4
  9. 9. Active Citation • Even when sources exist on-line, external hyperlinks offer only data access, not analytic or process transparency. We learn what a scholar cited but not why or how. • A new and innovative approach is required. Scholars are converging to the view that the most promising and practical default standard for enhancing qualitative transparency is Active Citation (AC): a system of digitally- enabled citations linked to annotated excerpts from original sources. https://thepoliticalmethodologist.com/2015/01/01/one-norm- two-standards-realizing-transparency-in-qualitative-political- science/#_edn18
  10. 10. • In the AC format, any citation to a contestable empirical claim is hyperlinked to an entry in an appendix appended to the scholarly work (the “Transparency Appendix” (TRAX)).[xviii] Each TRAX entry contains four elements, the first three required and the last one optionally: • a short excerpt from the source (presumptively 50-100 words long); • an annotation explaining how the source supports the underlying claim in the main text (of a length at the author’s discretion); • the full citation; • optionally, a scan of or link to the full source. https://thepoliticalmethodologist.com/2015/01/01/one-norm- two-standards-realizing-transparency-in-qualitative-political- science/#_edn18
  11. 11. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Juneman_Abraham
  12. 12. https://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/Stevens- ExampleActiveCitation.pdf
  13. 13. https://www.inera.com/customers/XUG-2017-CellPress- CRediT.pdf
  14. 14. https://www.inera.com/customers/XUG-2017-CellPress- CRediT.pdf
  15. 15. https://www.casrai.org/credit.html
  16. 16. https://www.casrai.org/credit.html Publons
  17. 17. PUBLONS: APPRECIATING REVIEWER
  18. 18. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367- 2630/18/4/043017/meta
  19. 19. kudos •Kudos points out that explaining your research in non- technical language increases accessibility to non- experts and helps you get that plain-language explanation out into the world. Kudos is also free, and its terms and conditions are simple and friendly to academics. https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/the-right-tools-to- empower-researchers
  20. 20. Prove vs. Improve Mindset https://www.slideshare.net/juneman/ Behavioural aspect (E Norris, 2019) https://psyarxiv.com/tch4w/ Fixed vs. Growth Mindset
  21. 21. https://osf.io/download/5d8c8641c8a75d0017614dcf/?version=1&displayName=Beh%20Science%20in%20 Open%20Science%20Editorial_Pre-Print-2019-09-26T09%3A33%3A51.926Z.pdf
  22. 22. https://i0.wp.com/sfdora.org/wp- content/uploads/2018/06/Dorabadge5.png?resize=200%2C20 0&ssl=1
  23. 23. Baker, M, Penny, D (2016) Is there a reproducibility crisis? Nature 533: 452–453.
  24. 24. https://www.scottdmiller.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/reproduce.png https://nobaproject.com/images/shared/images/000/002/736/original.png
  25. 25. • Smiling will make you feel happier • Self-control is a limited resource • Cleaning your hands will wash away your guilt • Being reminded of money makes us selfish Hargai Replikasi yang sungguh
  26. 26. Citizen Science? https://osf.io/dkcm3/
  27. 27. https://www.zooniverse.org/
  28. 28. Hasrat plos one (Praktik bagi pengelola jurnal ilmiah) • Our roots in innovation run deep; from mobilizing scientists’ desire for free and Open Access to the literature and building PLOS ONE to the journal it is today, to pioneering Article-Level Metrics as an alternative to journal impact factors • One of our top priorities this coming year is to improve the author experience since our authors are at the center of everything we do. Among their top concerns are ‘time to first decision’ and ‘time to publication’. We share their concerns and are committed to reducing this time as much as possible across all our journals. • The progress made with Aperta will not be wasted effort: we are currently exploring how to best leverage its unique strengths and capabilities to support core PLOS priorities like preprints and innovation in peer review. https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2017/12/ceo-letter-to-the-community-mudditt/
  29. 29. Aspirasi seorang user thd praktik os • First, I want a tool that will allow me to compare h-indexes across different fields. I understand that several researchers have discussed ways to make such comparisons. Although they undoubtedly understand the math, what I (a philosopher) want is a button I can press so that I can fairly compare my h- index with those of scientists and engineers at the same career stage. Ideally, I’d be able to use it on Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar citation databases. And please make it free. • The same applies to other members of society, who could make good use of tools developed for them to make academic research more accessible. Here, I mean something that goes beyond an open-access repository. Maybe someone might be interested in a ‘de-jargon’ tool, or a search engine that makes it easy for someone without extensive technical knowledge to find articles related to their problems. How could they use their own words, rather than unfamiliar technical academic terms to find what they are looking for? https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/the-right-tools-to-empower- researchers
  30. 30. Research transparency DATA TRANSPARENCY, OBLI GES SOCIAL SCIENTISTS TO PUBLICIZE THE EVIDENCE ON WHICH THEIR RESEARCH RESTS. ANALYTIC TRANSPARENCY, OBLIGES SOCIAL SCIENTISTS TO PUBLICIZE HOW THEY MEASURE, CODE, INTERPRET, AND ANALYZE THAT DATA. PROCESS TRANSPARENCY, OBLI GES SOCIAL SCIENTISTS TO PUBLICIZE THE BROADER SET OF RESEARCH DESIGN CHOICES THAT GAVE RISE TO THE PARTICULAR COMBINATION OF DATA, THEORIES, AND METHODS THEY EMPLOY. HTTPS://THEPOLITICALMETHODOL OGIST.COM/2015/01/01/ONE- NORM-TWO-STANDARDS- REALIZING-TRANSPARENCY-IN- QUALITATIVE-POLITICAL-SCIENCE/
  31. 31. Beberapa Pemantik ke depan (1) • Open Science (atau: Science): membiarkan semua pihak mengetahui dan terlibat dalam proses sains manapun, termasuk tinjauan sejawat pada saat menulis proposal riset. Aneh jika kita tidak tahu tetangga kita mengerjakan riset apa, dan ternyata satu topik dengan kita. • Beberapa insentif tingkat institusional: memberikan sabuk untuk jurnal yang menerapkan preregistrasi, atau perguruan tinggi memberikan kriteria angka kredit bagi kenaikan jabatan akademik/jabatan fungsional bagi dosen/peneliti yang melakukan praktik open science. • Akses terbuka memungkinkan dilakukannya penggunaan kembali (lihat lisensinya) bahkan meta-analisis, bukan hanya bebas membaca. Stigma terhadap kualitas jurnal dengan akses terbuka, disebabkan karena ulah sejumlah penerbit predator yang juga menampilkan tampang akses terbuka. https://f1000.com/resources/F1000R_Guide_OpenScience.pdf
  32. 32. Beberapa Pemantik ke depan (2) • Open peer review bukan hanya soal 'open'-nya, tetapi juga soal menyeimbangkan sentimen reviewer tertentu. Semua hasil review tidak bisa tidak mesti dipertanggungjawabkan kepada publik, bukan hanya kepada editor jurnal secara single-blind atau double-blind. Manajemen impresi reviewer dapat mendorong review yang lebih konstruktif. Di samping itu, manajemen pengetahuan hasil-hasil open review merupakan 'modal sosial', di samping 'kapital pengetahuan', yang luar biasa. Kualitas open peer review memiliki variasi tingkatan; ScienceOpen menerapkan moderasi dan filter kualifikasi reviewer, misalnya. Lokus open peer review bisa di dalam atau di luar artikel itu sendiri. • Falsifikasi tabel atau gambar dapat diperkecil dengan open data. • Sudah saatnya bukan hanya publikasi yang dapat dianggap memberikan kontribusi kepada sains, tetapi juga deposisi data dalam depositori dan juga open data serta penerbitan data (lihat juga: data in brief). • Gerakan yang lebih 'radikal' adalah open notebook yang berlangsung secara 'real time' untuk setiap fase dan faset kegiatan penelitian. https://f1000.com/resources/F1000R_Guide_OpenScience.pdf
  33. 33. Interoperability https://cdn.cos.io/media/images/research_lifecycle.original.png
  34. 34. Terima kasih Dr. Juneman Abraham juneman@binus.ac.id

×