Open Science, Why not?
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•366 views
Open Science, Why not? Presented at the Agreenskills meeting Paris, 15 February 2017 Abstract: Imagine YOUR research some time in the future! Abandon all preconceptions, and imagine an idealised way of how research might be done in the future. What does it look like? Is the knowledge you’ll create in the future constrained to your pencil scribbled notebook, to your lab, and to the pages of an elite journal? Or does it flow seamlessly across disciplines and collaborative teams. Is the knowledge you generate in the future categorised, labelled and published according to rigid disciplinary taxonomy, or is it being applied by people you never met and may never meet. Is the fruit of your labour so discoverable, accessible and re-usable that it advances knowledge, fixes real world problems in research directions that you never thought of possible anticipated? And imagine all that happens even while you are sleeping, but attributing full credit to you? That future may become the default setting sooner than you might guess. The presentation will briefly introduce Open Science in the context of an open, transparent, re-usable and reproducible research lifecycle, and present strategic and career arguments, such as why research of relevance to societal challenges can not afford not to adopt Open Science as the default setting.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Open Science, Why not?
Similar to Open Science, Why not? (20)
More from Nancy Pontika
More from Nancy Pontika (16)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Open Science, Why not?
- 1. AgreenSkills – Open Science, Why Not ? Paris, 15 February 2017 Nancy Pontika & Ivo Grigorov on behalf of FP7 FOSTER www.fosteropenscience.eu
- 2. Source : Embedding open science practices within evaluation systems can promote research that meets societal needs in developing countries, LSE Impact Blog Jan 2017 http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/. Image credit: 2 by “ academic impact trumps excellence and relevance together, the cost of which is researchers deviating from paths they would have followed were the incentive structures different. If researchers continue to be assessed using such narrow criteria, scientific research activitie will become further dislocated from the needs of the society “
- 3. No price provided for the e-version
- 4. Open Access Citation Advantage http://sparceurope.org/oaca/
- 5. Open Access Publication Funds http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OA_publication_funds http://www.oacompact.org/ http://sparceurope.org/analysis-of-funder-open- access-policies-around-the-world/
- 6. Know your way around OA services & tools http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php Sherpa Romeo https://doaj.org/
- 8. Source: Houghton, J., Swan, A. & Brown, S. Access to research and technical information in Denmark. (2011) http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/272603 19% of the processes developed would have been delayed or abandoned without access to research a 2.2 years delay would cost around EUR 5 million per firm in lost sales Does #OpenScience contribute to Economic Growth? www.fosteropenscience.eu
- 9. “Open Science is applied to optimise reproducibility” Excellence Impact Implementation “data accessibility is unclear!” “data storage & access not considered” www.fosteropenscience.eu “Open Access to scientific knowledge is an essential principle in the project, but there is not enough information on data management or IPR.” Can #OpenScience win Research Grants? (quotes from EC Evaluators 2014-2017)
- 10. “replace research impact indicators beyond the typical bibliometrics and patenting” Source: Horizon2020 Societal Challenge 6, WP 2017 “Better integration of evidence on the impact of research and innovation in policy making” https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/co-creation-08-2016-2017.html
- 11. “ two out of five studies substantially reproduced research findings, although not all experiments met thresholds of statistical significance ” Nature 541, 19 Jan 2017, doi:10.1038/541269a eLife elifesciences.org/collections/reproducibility-project-cancer-biology Stanley Flegler/Visuals Unlimited, Inc./Science Photo Library
- 12. Benefits of machine readability & TDM https://core.ac.uk/ • Improve productivity in the curation of biomedical literature by 50% • Accelerate drug discovery, reducing the 10-12 year average timeframe from discovery to market • Improves understanding of climate impact in the agro-industry • Helping to predict epidemics Source: TDM in Public Research, 2016 http://adbu.fr/competplug/uploads/2016/12/TDM-in-Public-Research-Revised-15-Dec-16.pdf
- 13. Good Luck with Open Science! Join the Open Science experiment at www.fosteropenscience.eu @ fosterscience # fosteropenscience ivgr@aqua.dtu.dk www.fosteropenscience.eu nancy.pontika@open.ac.uk
Editor's Notes
- Presentation Abstract: Imagine YOUR research some time in the future! Abandon all preconceptions, and imagine an idealised way of how research might be done in the future. What does it look like? Is the knowledge you’ll create in the future constrained to your pencil scribbled notebook, to your lab, and to the pages of an elite journal? Or does it flow seamlessly across disciplines and collaborative teams. Is the knowledge you generate in the future categorised, labelled and published according to rigid disciplinary taxonomy, or is it being applied by people you never met and may never meet. Is the fruit of your labour so discoverable, accessible and re-usable that it advances knowledge, fixes real world problems in research directions that you never thought of possible anticipated? And imagine all that happens even while you are sleeping, but attributing full credit to you? That future may become the default setting sooner than you might guess. The presentation will briefly introduce Open Science in the context of an open, transparent, re-usable and reproducible research lifecycle, and present strategic and career arguments, such as why research of relevance to societal challenges can not afford not to adopt Open Science as the default setting.
- IG: Before we dive in, we would like to highlight a recent study from Argentina, which we thought captured the essence of this morning’s session in the context of AgreenSkills network. The following 2 quotes, in just 8 lines of text, capture how and why the current definition of research excellence can actually be detrimental to solving Societal Challenges with YOUR research efforts. What the authors of the study are refering to here is the pinacle manifestation of research excelence, the prestigeous journal article, and the evidence they offer is that researchers in developing countries, while striving to live up to expectation imposed by the current publishing system, results in research workflows that, as the quote says, are “dislocated from the needs of society”. This is a very tough criticism of research as a whole, but it is not the first time it has been voiced by respected members of the research community. If it makes little sense to you, early on a Wednesday morning, Nancy and I would like to offer you a light-hearted ROLE-PLAY of how research may have arrived to this situation. NP: The main CHARACTERS in our role-play are the SCEPTICAL SCIENTISTS represented by IVO, and the KNOWLEDGE MANAGERS that supports them, represented by Nancy.
- NP: So Ivo, I heard that you are almost done analysing your research data, congratulations. Are you ready to get published? Have you chosen you journal yet? IG: Yes, I ‘ve spent a lot of time in this research and I believe it is EXCELLENT. It deserves to go in a high impact, PRESTIGIOUS journal. That’s why I have chosen the JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, published by Elsevier. Your colleagues tell me that unfortunately the cost for making my article Open Access to developing countries where the research is VERY relevant are also high, but such is the price of EXCELLENT research, and at the end excellence is all that counts.
- NP: Quality research is important, of course, but it doesn’t have to be that way. Offering your outputs open access is very important for the impact of your study, the advancement of your subject field and the society as a whole. Why don’t you choose an open access journal instead? Research has shown that the open access publications have a higher citation advantage ranging from 20% to 70%, even in Agricultural Science. IG: I would have gone with the Open Access option of the PLoS journals, but the article processing charges are so expensive you won’t believe it! I just don’t have the funds.
- NP: You can always try a pure open access journal, only 18% of them charge an APC. Also, some pure OA journals waive the article processing charges for those whose research is not financially supported. Have you checked with the research office, or library if there is an institutional fund available? Maybe there is some money available for publishing in pure OA journals. In addition, did you know that almost all funders allow you to spend research grants funding on OA costs? IG: Nah, I looked a couple of years ago and there weren't any high top rank open access journals in my field. Either way, my research is good, and I will stick to the JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY journal, even though only a few can access it, it prestigious.
- NP: I recommend that you check again the DOAJ, as open access is constantly growing and the same happens with the open access journals. Nonetheless, I am sure your publisher allows sharing openly your results, right? That way you can share both your paper and data openly via a research and data repository? You have to comply with your funders’ requirements. IG: I am a free academic and I will do what I want, I will publish where I want and do whatever I want with MY data. I won’t be restricted and formulate my decision based on what the funders want and what the publishers allow! Papers is all that matters for career.
- NP: Currently there are more than 700 OA policies from institutions, funders and organisations. After all, as long as your research is funded by a public funding body you are entitled to respect your funders’ rules. In that case you have to check carefully your funders’ requirements. The vast majority of the OA policies require the self-archive in a repository, (what we call a green OA policy) which is so easy to do and it costs nothing. Specifically the EU’s policy requires that all research funded by the EU needs to deposited in a repository and be made available open access. IG: For the time being I only care about the publication in the “real” journal. The rest of the open access and open science stuff are secondary to me only because I find that it is a lot of trouble. It just costs too much to publish OA, it costs a lot to create data management plans and organise your data in a meaningful way that everyone can read and understand.
- NP: I don’t agree with you on that one. If you take into consideration that it costs approximately a hundred thousand euros to produce your research and publish the research results, you will see in the end that OS is a very small but necessary operational cost. I mean, compare to the time and money it takes to write a publication and how little time you spend to make others aware of your results and findings. IG: I just can’t be bothered, you know. You spend all this effort, energy and money for what? Nobody cares about my scientific research results. The lay person cannot understand it and businesses, oh they don’t care about what we do in academia. NP: Are you sure about that? On the slide there are some good examples
- NP: I am sure you don’t know the type of research and the needs of every researcher in the world! In my opinion this is time well invested and it makes grants more competitive through societal Impact and the need to demonstrate that you don’t do research only for your fellow academics, but this needs to be integrated in the society for the benefit and the advancement of the society. IG: Alright, I see what you are saying, but I think I will pass. The publication is the only output that counts for excellence and I just need to know how to play this game well. I am too busy to deal with everything, I teach, do research and serve in many committees. I don’t believe I will be excluded if I don’t follow the OS rules?
- NP: Actually yes, you will be excluded. Not in the way that you mean it, but in Research Excellence Frameworks, impact is a high weight, there are hundred of funder mandates across the EU. The REF Indicators developed beyond counting papers, citations and patents, meaning that all of YOU will be evaluated in much more complex ways than your mentors that helped you get this far. IG: Yes all that is politics, but what does OS really give back to ME, and to research, apart from extra work?
- NP: Don’t forget about research REPRODUCIBILITY, OS is about transparency, collaboration and independent validation! As you may have experienced yourself, a lot of money is spent in labs as we speak re-conducting research that has already been done somewhere else. There are thousands of researchers and PhD students out there, even perhaps at the same academic institution with you, who are working on the same topic as you, and it just happens that none of you is aware of that. IG: Wow, ONLY 2 of 5 studies in Cancer Biology are statistically reproducible! I don’t not know that!
- IG: Ok, more reproducibility is great, but OS is asking me to change my ENTIRE WORKFLOW! What else do we get in return? I need to see the value of this extra work and its connection with the work of others. NP: One good example is text and data mining. Provided that the research outputs are machine readable. Do you know that every year 2.5 m papers are being published? It is impossible to read and analyse all this information and digest all this knowledge. It requires that outputs are made available for machine readability, which helps “improve productivity in the curation of biomedical literature by 50%”, “accelerate drug discovery, reducing the 10-12 year average timeframe from discovery to Market”, driving progress for the cure of diseases.