Downloaded 17 times
![Call to action
[Tussenslide (of transitie in slide) over custom URL?]
http://101innovations.wordpress.com](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/good-efficient-open-oai9-presentation-kramer-bosman-150618052226-lva1-app6892/75/The-good-the-efficient-and-the-open-changing-research-workflows-and-the-need-to-move-from-Open-Access-to-Open-Science-29-2048.jpg)
![Call to action
[Tussenslide (of transitie in slide) over custom URL?]
http://101innovations.wordpress.com
custom URL](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/good-efficient-open-oai9-presentation-kramer-bosman-150618052226-lva1-app6892/75/The-good-the-efficient-and-the-open-changing-research-workflows-and-the-need-to-move-from-Open-Access-to-Open-Science-30-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byhierohiero
The good, the efficient and the open: changing research workflows and the need to move from Open Access to Open Science
This document discusses changing research workflows and the need to transition from open access to open science. It presents several models of the research workflow as multi-cyclic and multi-ordered, with loops for activities like grant writing, experimentation, and publishing. The document outlines three goals for science: being good, efficient, and open. It then analyzes survey data on tools researchers use at different stages of the workflow and how they align with open science principles. The findings suggest a shift towards more open tools and formats.
More Related Content
Similar to The good, the efficient and the open: changing research workflows and the need to move from Open Access to Open Science
The good, the efficient and the open: changing research workflows and the need to move from Open Access to Open Science
- 1. (except logo’s) The good,the efficient, and the open changing research workflows and the need to move from Open Access to Open Science Bianca Kramer & Jeroen Bosman , Utrecht University Library Geneva Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI9), Geneva, June 18, 2015 @MsPhelps @jeroenbosman
- 2.
- 3. Simple cyclic modelof the research workflow preparation analysis writingpublication outreach assessment discovery
- 4. Multi-cyclic model ofthe research workflow preparation analysis writingpublication outreach assessment discovery Rounds of grant writing and application Iterations of search and reading Drafting, receiving comments,rewriting Submit, peer review, rejection, resubmitting Rounds of experiments and measurements
- 5. Multi-cyclic model ofthe research workflow, with loops preparation analysis writingpublication outreach assessment discovery Rounds of grant writing and application Iterations of search and reading Drafting, receiving comments,rewriting Submit, peer review, rejection, resubmitting Rounds of experiments and measurements
- 6. A multi-cyclic, multi-ordered modelof the research workflow, with loops preparation analysis writingpublication outreach assessment discovery Rounds of grant writing and application Iterations of search and reading Drafting, receiving comments,rewriting Submit, peer review, rejection, resubmitting Rounds of experiments and measurements
- 7. A multi-cyclic, multi-ordered modelof the research workflow, with loops preparation analysis writingpublication outreach assessment discovery Rounds of grant writing and application Iterations of search and reading Drafting, receiving comments,rewriting Submit, peer review, rejection, resubmitting Rounds of experiments and measurements
- 8. Three goals forscience & scholarship (G-E-O) • declaring competing interests • replication & reproducibility • meaningful assessment • effective quality checks • credit where it is due • no fraud, plagiarism • connected tools & platforms • no publ. size restrictions • null result publishing • speed of publication • (web)standards, IDs • semantic discovery • re-useability • versioning open peer review • open (lab)notes • plain language • open drafting • open access • CC-0/BY • good efficient open technical changes & standards research governance changes economic & copyright changes researcher funder publisher public government library
- 9.
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15. Survey: 1st 1000results What is you research role? What discipline are you working in?
- 16. Survey: 1st 1000results 64 countries 1 300
- 17. Breakdown examples What toolsdo you use to get access to literature etc.?
- 18. Breakdown examples What toolsdo you use to archive/share data &code ?
- 19. Tool combinations inworkflows ResearchGate (share pub + researcher profile) SPSS LaTeX 1000 0
- 20. Distribution across Good-Efficient-Open GoodEfficient Open 100% 80% 60% 40% 20%
- 21. Make these datawork for you ?
- 22. Make these datawork for you Do Asian postdocs look more to impact factors to select a journal to publish in than their Latin American counterparts?
- 23. Make these datawork for you Is sharing ‘preprints’ gaining traction beyond the fields of astronomy, physics and math, and if so, what platforms are used?
- 24. Make these datawork for you Which tools are used in multiple research phases, and are they leading tools in any of these phases?
- 25.
- 26.
- 27. “Focus shifting from‘journals’ to individual publishable units (articles, but also other research output)”
- 28. “Clear(er) shift towardsopen science / open access, leading to a diminishing importance of traditional journals”
- 29. Call to action [Tussenslide(of transitie in slide) over custom URL?] http://101innovations.wordpress.com
- 30. Call to action [Tussenslide(of transitie in slide) over custom URL?] http://101innovations.wordpress.com custom URL
- 31.
- 32.
Editor's Notes
- #2 Motiverend en voor ons belangrijk, afgelopen 20 jaar en vooral laatste 5-10 jaar meer in onderzoek/publiceren veranderd dan 350 jaar daarvoor
- #4 Simpel, kan nog simpeler, blijft model; werkelijk onderzoek nooit sequentieel
- #5 Simpel, kan nog simpeler, blijft model; werkelijk onderzoek nooit sequentieel
- #6 Simpel, kan nog simpeler, blijft model; werkelijk onderzoek nooit sequentieel
- #7 Simpel, kan nog simpeler, blijft model; werkelijk onderzoek nooit sequentieel
- #8 Simpel, kan nog simpeler, blijft model; werkelijk onderzoek nooit sequentieel