Abstract
The aim of this study was to conduct a comprehensive literature review of the dimensions of open science in research processes. A total of four databases and snowball searching were used for the comprehensive literature review during 2011–2020; then, we were able to find 98 studies based on the inclusion criteria. Also, we used thematic method to review the relevant studies and identified three categories of dimensions in the research process, namely (1) the publication and sharing category including open access, open data, transparency and reproducibility, citizen science, and crowd sourcing; (2) the infrastructure and cultural category including open infrastructure, open education, open tools, budget mechanism, open culture, and communication; and (3) governance and evaluation including policies, governance, and the ethical principles associated with open science. Open science emphasizes the efforts to open and make the scientific research process more inclusive so as to engage the inside and outside actors in the research process.
Acknowledgments
We appreciate of Iran University of Medical Sciences for support.
-
Research funding: This work was supported by Partial financial from Iran University of Medical Sciences.
Appendix 1: Search term used for search
| Database | Search strategy | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Pubmed | ((“open Science”[Title/Abstract]) OR (“openness research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science guideline*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science rule*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science practice*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science approache*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open Scientific publication*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open access publishing”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science tools”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science polic*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“polic*, open science”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science standard*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science license*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science governance*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science stakeholder*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science advocacy”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science barrier*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science ethic*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“ethic*, open science”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research ethic*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“ethic* in open access publishing”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science issue*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research issue*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science challenge*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research challenge*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open knowledge challenge*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science legal issue*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science communicat*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open scientific communicat*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research culture”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science culture”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research collaborat*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open science collaborat*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open e-research infrastructure*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research infrastructure*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open scholarly infrastructure*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open participatory research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“open scholarship”[Title/Abstract])) AND ((((((((((((((“scholarly publish*”[Title/Abstract]) OR (“scientific publication*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research integrit*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research process”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research practice*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“scientific process”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“health services research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research, medical”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“medical research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research, health service*”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“health research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research, health”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“healthcare research”[Title/Abstract])) OR (“research, healthcare”[Title/Abstract])) | 140 |
| Scopus | (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open Science”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“openness research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science guideline*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science rule*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science practice*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science approache*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open Scientific publication*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open access publishing”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science tools”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science polic*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“polic*, open science”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science standard*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science license*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science governance*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science stakeholder*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science advocacy”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science barrier*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science ethic*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“ethic*, open science”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research ethic*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Ethic* in open access publishing”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science issue*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research issue*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science challenge*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research challenge*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research challenge*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open knowledge Challenge*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science legal issue*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science communicat*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open Scientific Communicat*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research culture”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science culture”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research collaborat*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open science collaborat*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open e-research infrastructure*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research infrastructure*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open scholarly infrastructure*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open participatory research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“open scholarship”)) AND (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“scholarly publish*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“scientific publication*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research integrit*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research process”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research practice*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“scientific process”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“health service* research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research, medical”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“medical research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research, health service*”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“health research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research, health”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“healthcare research”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“research, healthcare”)) | 699 |
| Web of science | 1. TS=(“open Science” OR “openness research” OR “open science guideline*” OR “open science rule*” OR “open science practice*” OR “open science approache*” OR “open Scientific publication*” OR “open access publishing” OR “open science tools” OR “open science polic*” OR “polic*, open science” OR “open science standard*” OR “open science license*” OR “open science governance*” OR “open science stakeholder*” OR “open science advocacy” OR “open science barrier*” OR “open science ethic*” OR “ethic*, open science” OR “open research ethic*” OR “Ethic* in open access publishing” OR “open science issue*” OR “open research issue*” OR “open science challenge*” OR “open research challenge*” OR “open knowledge Challenge*” OR “open science legal issue*” OR “open science communicat*” OR “open Scientific Communicat*” OR “open research culture” OR “open science culture” OR “open research collaborat*” OR “open science collaborat*” OR “open e-research infrastructure*” OR “open research infrastructure*” OR “open scholarly infrastructure*” OR “open participatory research” OR “open research” OR “open scholarship”) 2. TS=(“scholarly publish*” OR “scientific publication*” OR “research integrit*” OR “research process” OR “research practice*” OR “scientific process” OR “health service* research” OR “research, medical” OR “medical research” OR “research, health service*” OR “health research” OR “research, health” OR “healthcare research” OR “research, healthcare”) #3 AND #1 |
293 |
| ProQuest | AB,TI(“open Science” OR “openness research” OR “open science guideline*” OR “open science rule*” OR “open science practice*” OR “open science approache*” OR “open Scientific publication*” OR “open access publishing” OR “open science tools” OR “open science polic*” OR “polic*, open science” OR “open science standard*” OR “open science license*” OR “open science governance*” OR “open science stakeholder*” OR “open science advocacy” OR “open science barrier*” OR “open science ethic*” OR “ethic*, open science” OR “open research ethic*” OR “Ethic* in open access publishing” OR “open science issue*” OR “open research issue*” OR “open science challenge*” OR “open research challenge*” OR “open knowledge Challenge*” OR “open science legal issue*” OR “open science communicat*” OR “open Scientific Communicat*” OR “open research culture” OR “open science culture” OR “open research collaborat*” OR “open science collaborat*” OR “open e-research infrastructure*” OR “open research infrastructure*” OR “open scholarly infrastructure*” OR “open participatory research” OR “open research” OR “open scholarship”) AND AB,TI(“scholarly publish*” OR “scientific publication*” OR “research integrit*” OR “research process” OR “research practice*” OR “scientific process” OR “health service* research” OR “research, medical” OR “medical research” OR “research, health service*” OR “health research” OR “research, health” OR “healthcare research” OR “research, healthcare”) | 88 |
| Snowball searching | 97 | |
References
Akterian, S. G. 2017. “Towards Open Access Scientific Publishing.” Biomedical Reviews 28: 125–33. https://doi.org/10.14748/bmr.v28.4459.Search in Google Scholar
Albornoz, D., M. Huang, I. Martin, M. Mateus, A. Touré, and L. Chan. 2018. Framing Power: Tracing Key Discourses in Open Science Policies. Toronto: ELPUB Toronto.10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2018.23Search in Google Scholar
Anagnostou, P., M. Capocasa, N. Milia, E. Sanna, C. Battaggia, D. Luzi, and G. D. Bisol. 2015. “When Data Sharing Gets Close to 100%: What Human Paleogenetics Can Teach the Open Science Movement.” PLoS One 10 (3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121409.Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M., A. Niemann, A. L. Johnson, C. Cook, D. Tritz, and M. Vassar. 2019. “Transparent, Reproducible, and Open Science Practices of Published Literature in Dermatology Journals: Cross-Sectional Analysis.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 2 (1): e16078. https://doi.org/10.2196/16078.Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, M. S., E. A. Ronning, R. De Vries, and B. C. Martinson. 2010. “Extending the Mertonian Norms: Scientists’ Subscription to Norms of Research.” The Journal of Higher Education 81 (3): 366–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2010.11779057.Search in Google Scholar
Austin, C. C., T. Bloom, S. Dallmeier-Tiessen, V. K. Khodiyar, F. Murphy, A. Nurnberger, L. Raymond, M. Stockhause, J. Tedds, M. Vardigan, and A. Whyte. 2016. “Key Components of Data Publishing: Using Current Best Practices to Develop a Reference Model for Data Publishing.” International Journal on Digital Libraries 18 (2): 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-016-0178-2.Search in Google Scholar
Banks, G. C., J. G. Field, F. L. Oswald, E. H. O’Boyle, R. S. Landis, D. E. Rupp, and S. G. Rogelberg. 2019. “Answers to 18 Questions about Open Science Practices.” Journal of Business and Psychology 34 (3): 257–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9547-8.Search in Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, L., and J. Havemann. 2020. “The Varying Openness of Digital Open Science Tools [version 2; Peer Review: 1 Approved, 1 Approved with Reservations].” F1000Research 9 (1292): 1292. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.26615.2.Search in Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, L., R. Quick, and H. Shanahan. 2020. ““Ethics when You Least Expect it”: A Modular Approach to Short Course Data Ethics Instruction.” Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4): 2189–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00197-2.Search in Google Scholar
Borgerud, C., and E. Borglund. 2020. “Open Research Data, an Archival Challenge?” Archival Science 20 (3): 279–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-020-09330-3.Search in Google Scholar
Bowman, N. D., and P. R. Spence. 2020. “Challenges and Best Practices Associated with Sharing Research Materials and Research Data for Communication Scholars.” Communication Studies 71 (4): 708–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2020.1799488.Search in Google Scholar
Burgelman, J. C., C. Pascu, K. Szkuta, R. Von Schomberg, A. Karalopoulos, K. Repanas, and M. Schouppe. 2019. “Open Science, Open Data, and Open Scholarship: European Policies to Make Science Fit for the Twenty-First Century.” Frontiers in Big Data 2 (43): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2019.00043.Search in Google Scholar
Childs, S., J. McLeod, E. Lomas, and G. Cook. 2014. “Opening Research Data: Issues and Opportunities.” Records Management Journal 24 (2): 142–62. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-01-2014-0005.Search in Google Scholar
Choi, Y. J., H. W. Choi, and S. Kim. 2020. “Compliance of “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing” in Academic Society Published Journals.” Science Editing 7 (1): 24–33. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.186.Search in Google Scholar
Connor, C., R. B. Mailto, C. V. Cecilia, E. Fulvio, K. Eva, M. Katrien, M. Janet, and V. Karen. 2017. Evaluation of Research Careers Fully Acknowledging Open Science Practices Rewards, Incentives and/or Recognition for Researchers Practicing Open Science. Luxembourg: European Commission.Search in Google Scholar
Danny, M., F. Madelaine, C. Huriviades, and S. Dalys. 2019. “Digital Institutional Repositories, Component of Open Science to Disseminate Scientific Publications: Case Repository UTP-Ridda2.” Conference Paper Proceedings – 2019 7th International Engineering, Sciences and Technology Conference: IESTEC 2019.10.1109/IESTEC46403.2019.00122Search in Google Scholar
Dienlin, T., N. Johannes, N. D. Bowman, P. K. Masur, S. Engesser, A. S. Kümpel, J. Lukito, L. M. Bier, R. Zhang, B. K. Johnson, R. Huskey, F. M. Schneider, J. Breuer, D. A. Parry, I. Vermeulen, J. T. Fisher, J. Banks, R. Weber, D. A. Ellis, T. Smits, J. D. Ivory, S. Trepte, B. McEwan, E. M. Rinke, G. Neubaum, S. Winter, C. J. Carpenter, N. Krämer, S. Utz, J. Unkel, X. Wang, B. I. Davidson, N. Kim, A. S. Won, E. Domahidi, N. A. Lewis, and C. de Vreese. 2020. “An Agenda for Open Science in Communication.” Journal of Communication 71 (1). https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz052.Search in Google Scholar
Dorch, B. F. 2015. “Open, Transparent and Honest–The Way We Practice Research.” Nordic Perspectives on Open Science 1: 25–30. https://doi.org/10.7557/11.3618.Search in Google Scholar
Dörler, D., and F. Heigl. 2019. “Citizen Science in Austria.” VOEB-Mitteilungen 72 (2): 317–27. https://doi.org/10.31263/voebm.v72i2.2835.Search in Google Scholar
Dushina, S. A., V. A. Kupriyanov, and T. V. Khvatova. 2018. “Academic Social Media as a Representation of the “Open Science”.” Sociologia Nauki I Tehnologij-Sociology of Science & Technology 9 (3): 80–98. https://doi.org/10.24411/2079-0910-2018-10015.Search in Google Scholar
Edmunds, S. C., P. Li, C. I. Hunter, S. Z. Xiao, R. L. Davidson, N. Nogoy, and L. Goodman. 2017. “Experiences in Integrated Data and Research Object Publishing Using GigaDB.” International Journal on Digital Libraries 18 (2): 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-016-0174-6.Search in Google Scholar
Eger, T., M. Scheufen, and D. Meierrieks. 2015. “The Determinants of Open Access Publishing: Survey Evidence from Germany.” European Journal of Law and Economics 39 (3): 475–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-015-9488-x.Search in Google Scholar
European Commission. 2017a. Next-generation Metrics: Responsible Metrics and Evaluation for Open Science. Report of the European Commission Expert Group on Altmetrics. Brussels: European Commission.Search in Google Scholar
European Commission. 2017b. Providing Researchers with the Skills and Competencies They Need to Practise Open Science. Brussels: European Commission.Search in Google Scholar
Friesike, S., B. Widenmayer, O. Gassmann, and T. Schildhauer. 2015. “Opening Science: Towards an Agenda of Open Science in Academia and Industry.” The Journal of Technology Transfer 40 (4): 581–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9375-6.Search in Google Scholar
Gilroy, S. P., and B. A. Kaplan. 2019. “Furthering Open Science in Behavior Analysis: An Introduction and Tutorial for Using GitHub in Research.” Perspectives on Behavior Science 42 (3): 565–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019-00202-5.Search in Google Scholar
Grand, A., C. Wilkinson, K. Bultitude, and A. F. T. Winfield. 2016. “Mapping the Hinterland: Data Issues in Open Science.” Public Understanding of Science 25 (1): 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514530374.Search in Google Scholar
Grand, A. 2012. “Open Science and Public Engagement: Exploring the Potential of the Open Paradigm to Support Public Engagement with Science.” Doctoral diss., Electronic Thesis or diss., University of the West of England, EBSCOhost.Search in Google Scholar
Hagger, M. S. 2019. “Embracing Open Science and Transparency in Health Psychology.” Health Psychology Review 13 (2): 131–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1605614.Search in Google Scholar
Hampton, S. E., S. S. Anderson, S. C. Bagby, C. Gries, X. Han, E. M. Hart, M. B. Jones, W. C. Lenhardt, A. Macdonald, W. K. Michener, J. Mudge, A. Pourmokhtarian, M. P. Schildhauer, K. H. Woo, and N. Zimmerman. 2015. “The Tao of Open Science for Ecology.” Ecosphere 6 (7): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00402.1.Search in Google Scholar
Hardwicke, T. E., J. D. Wallach, M. C. Kidwell, T. Bendixen, S. Crüwell, and J. P. A. Ioannidis. 2020. “An Empirical Assessment of Transparency and Reproducibility-Related Research Practices in the Social Sciences (2014–2017).” Royal Society Open Science 7 (2): 190806. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190806.Search in Google Scholar
Hasselbring, W., L. Carr, S. Hettrick, H. Packer, and T. Tiropanis. 2020. “From FAIR Research Data toward FAIR and Open Research Software.” IT – Information Technology 62 (1): 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1515/itit-2019-0040.Search in Google Scholar
Hrynaszkiewicz, I. 2020. “Publishers’ Responsibilities in Promoting Data Quality and Reproducibility.” Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology 257: 319–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/164_2019_290.Search in Google Scholar
Isaacowitz, D. M., and M. Lind. 2019. “Open Science is for Aging Research, Too.” Innovation in Aging 3 (4): igz028. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igz028.Search in Google Scholar
Kennedy, M. L., and J. Ruttenberg. 2019. “Implementing Open Science Principles through Research Partnerships.” In IFLA WLIC 2019 – Athens, Greece – Libraries: Dialogue for Change. Athens: IFLA WLIC.Search in Google Scholar
Kretser, A., D. Murphy, S. Bertuzzi, T. Abraham, D. B. Allison, K. J. Boor, J. Dwyer, A. Grantham, L. J. Harris, R. Hollander, C. Jacobs-Young, S. Rovito, D. Vafiadis, C. Woteki, J. Wyndham, and R. Yada. 2019. “Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium.” Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (2): 327–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00094-3.Search in Google Scholar
Kuprienė, J., and Ž. Petrauskienė. 2018. “Opening Science with Institutional Repository: A Case Study of Vilnius University Library.” LIBER Quarterly 28 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10217.Search in Google Scholar
Lacey, J., R. Coates, and M. Herington. 2020. “Open Science for Responsible Innovation in Australia: Understanding the Expectations and Priorities of Scientists and Researchers.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (3): 427–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1800969.Search in Google Scholar
Lakomý, M., R. Hlavová, H. Machackova, G. Bohlin, M. Lindholm, M. G. Bertero, and M. Dettenhofer. 2020. “The Motivation for Citizens’ Involvement in Life Sciences Research Is Predicted by Age and Gender.” PLoS One 15 (8): e0237140. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237140.Search in Google Scholar
League of European Research Universities. 2018. Open Science and its Role in Universities: A Roadmap for Cultural Change. Edinburgh: League of European Research Universities.Search in Google Scholar
Leena, P., E. Lilja, and M. Ala-Mantila. 2020. Atlas of Open Science and Research in Finland 2019: Evaluation of Openness in the Activities of Higher Education Institutions, Research Institutes, Research-Funding Organisations, Finnish Academic and Cultural Institutes Abroad and Learned Societies and Academies. Final Report. Finland: Publications of the Ministry of Education and Culture. http://urn.fi/URN (accessed March 5, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
LERU. 2013. LERU Roadmap For Research Data. LERU Research Data Working Group. https://www.leru.org/files/LERU-Roadmap-for-Research-Data-Full-paper.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Levin, N., S. Leonelli, D. Weckowska, D. Castle, and J. Dupré. 2016. “How Do Scientists Define Openness? Exploring the Relationship between Open Science Policies and Research Practice.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 36 (2): 128–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467616668760.Search in Google Scholar
Link, G. J. P., K. Lumbard, K. Conboy, M. Feldman, J. Feller, J. George, M. Germonprez, S. Goggins, D. Jeske, G. Kiely, K. Schuster, and M. Willis. 2017. “Contemporary Issues of Open Data in Information Systems Research: Considerations and Recommendations.” Communications of the Association for Information Systems 41 (1): 587–610. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04125.Search in Google Scholar
Lodwick, L. 2019. “Sowing the Seeds of Future Research: Data Sharing, Citation and Reuse in Archaeobotany.” Open Quaternary 5 (1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5334/oq.62.Search in Google Scholar
Lyon, L. 2016. “Transparency: The Emerging Third Dimension of Open Science and Open Data.” LIBER Quarterly 25 (4): 153–71. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10113.Search in Google Scholar
Mancini, D., A. Lardo, and M. De Angelis. 2020. “Efforts towards Openness and Transparency of Data: A Focus on Open Science Platforms.” In Exploring digital ecosystems, Vol. 33, edited by A. Lazazzara, F. Ricciardi, and S. Za, 67–84. Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-23665-6_6Search in Google Scholar
Ministry of Education and Culture’s Open Science and Research Initiative. 2014. Open Science and Research Leads to Surprising Discoveries and Creative Insights. Open Science and Research Roadmap 2014–2017. Helsinki: The Ministry of Education and Culture.Search in Google Scholar
Mosconi, G., Q. Y. Li, D. Randall, H. Karasti, P. Tolmie, J. Barutzky, M. Korn, and V. Pipek. 2019. “Three Gaps in Opening Science.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work-the Journal of Collaborative Computing and Work Practices 28 (3–4): 749–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-019-09354-z.Search in Google Scholar
Naim, K., M. G. Pia, A. Kohls, T. Basaglia, S. Van De Sandt, P. J. FokianosGonzalez Lopez, J. Serrano, J. Brankovic, and L. H. Nielsen. 2020. Pushing the Boundaries Of Open Science at CERN: Submission to the UNESCO Open Science Consultation. Geneva: CERN Document Server.Search in Google Scholar
Nandigam, V., K. Lin, M. Shantharam, S. Sakai, and S. Sivagnanam. 2020. “Research Workflows - towards Reproducible Science via Detailed Provenance Tracking in Open Science Chain.” In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. Conference on Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing: Catch the Wave.10.1145/3311790.3399619Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, D. M., and M. B. Twidale. 2017. “Metrics for Openness.” The Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68 (4): 1048–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23741.Search in Google Scholar
Nosek, B., G. Alter, G. C. Banks, D. Borsboom, S. D. Bowman, S. J. Breckler, S. Buck, C. D. Chambers, G. Chin, G. Christensen, M. Contestabile, A. Dafoe, E. Eich, J. Freese, R. Glennerster, D. Goroff, D. P. Green, B. Hesse, M. Humphreys, J. Ishiyama, D. Karlan, A. Kraut, A. Lupia, P. Mabry, T. Madon, N. Malhotra, E. Mayo-Wilson, M. McNutt, E. Miguel, E. L. Paluck, U. Simonsohn, C. Soderberg, B. A. Spellman, J. Turitto, G. VandenBos, S. Vazire, E. J. Wagenmakers, R. Wilson, and T. Yarkoni. 2015. “Supplementary Materials for Promoting an Open Research Culture.” Science 348: 1422–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2734.Search in Google Scholar
Nosek, B. A., G. Alter, G. C. Banks, D. Borsboom, S. D. Bowman, S. J. Breckler, S. Buck, C. D. Chambers, G. Chin, G. Christensen, M. Contestabile, A. Dafoe, E. Eich, J. Freese, R. Glennerster, D. Goroff, D. P. Green, B. Hesse, M. Humphreys, J. Ishiyama, D. Karlan, A. Kraut, A. Lupia, P. Mabry, T. Madon, N. Malhotra, E. Mayo-Wilson, M. McNutt, E. Miguel, E. L. Paluck, U. Simonsohn, C. Soderberg, B. A. Spellman, J. Turitto, G. VandenBos, S. Vazire, E. J. Wagenmakers, R. Wilson, and T. Yarkoni. 2015. “Promoting an Open Research Culture. Science. American Association for the Advancement of Science.” American Association for the Advancement of Science 348 (6242): 1422–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2374.Search in Google Scholar
OECD. 2015. Making Open Science a Reality. Paris: OECD Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Okret-Manville, C. 2016. “Academic Social Networks and Open Access: French Researchers at the Crossroads.” LIBER Quarterly 25 (3): 118–35. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10131.Search in Google Scholar
Onyancha, O. B. 2016. “Open Research Data in Sub-saharan Africa: A Bibliometric Study Using the Data Citation Index.” Publishing Research Quarterly 32 (3): 227–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-016-9463-6.Search in Google Scholar
Payne, P., O. Lele, B. Johnson, and E. Holve. 2017. “Enabling Open Science for Health Research: Collaborative Informatics Environment for Learning on Health Outcomes (CIELO).” Journal of Medical Internet Research 19 (7): e276. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6937.Search in Google Scholar
Penev, L. 2017. “From Open Access to Open Science from the Viewpoint of a Scholarly Publisher.” Research Ideas and Outcomes 3: 392. https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.3.e12265.Search in Google Scholar
Pitschan, M., M. H. Schmidt, and C. Blume. 2020. “Principles of Open, Transparent and Reproducible Science in Author Guidelines of Sleep Research and Chronobiology Journals [version 1; Peer Review: 3 Approved with Reservations].” Wellcome Open Research 5 (172): 1–27. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16111.2.Search in Google Scholar
Piwowar, H. A., T. J. Vision, and M. C. Whitlock. 2011. “Data Archiving Is a Good Investment.” Nature 473 (7347): 285. https://doi.org/10.1038/473285a.Search in Google Scholar
Pontika, N., P. Knoth, M. Cancellieri, and S. Pearce. 2015. “Fostering Open Science to Research Using a Taxonomy and an eLearning Portal.” In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Knowledge Technologies and Data-Driven Business.10.1145/2809563.2809571Search in Google Scholar
Powers, S. M., and S. E. Hampton. 2019. “Open Science, Reproducibility, and Transparency in Ecology.” Ecological Applications 29 (1): e01822. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1822.Search in Google Scholar
Qian, D., S. Eunjung, and S. Carthage. 2018. Open and Inclusive Collaboration in Science: A Framework. France: Science and Technology Policy Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Raju, R., J. Raju, and J. Claassen. 2015. “Open Scholarship Practices Reshaping South Africa’s Scholarly Publishing Roadmap.” Publications 3 (4): 263–84. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications3040263.Search in Google Scholar
Randles, B. M., I. V. Pasquetto, M. S. Golshan, and C. L. Borgman. 2017. “Using the Jupyter Notebook as a Tool for Open Science: An Empirical Study.” In Conference Paper, ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL).10.1109/JCDL.2017.7991618Search in Google Scholar
Rauh, S., T. Torgerson, A. L. Johnson, J. Pollard, D. Tritz, and M. Vassar. 2020. “Reproducible and Transparent Research Practices in Published Neurology Research.” Research Integrity and Peer Review 5 (5). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-020-0091-5.Search in Google Scholar
Rentier, B. 2016. “Open Science: A Revolution in Sight?” Interlending and Document Supply 44 (4): 155–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILDS-06-2016-0020.Search in Google Scholar
Rice, R. 2019. “Supporting Research Data Management and Open Science in Academic Libraries: A Data Librarian’s View.” VOEB-Mitteilungen 72 (2): 263–73. https://doi.org/10.31263/voebm.v72i2.3303.Search in Google Scholar
Ross-Hellauer, T., and E. Görögh. 2019. “Guidelines for Open Peer Review Implementation.” Research Integrity and Peer Review 4: 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0063-9.Search in Google Scholar
Rowhani-Farid, A., and A. G. Barnett. 2016. “Has Open Data Arrived at the British Medical Journal (BMJ)? An Observational Study.” BMJ Open 6 (10): e011784. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011784.Search in Google Scholar
Rowhani-Farid, A. 2018. “Towards a Culture of Open Science and Data Sharing in Health and Medical Research.” Doctoral diss., Queensland University of Technology.Search in Google Scholar
Samuel, G., and G. Derrick. 2020. “Defining Ethical Standards for the Application of Digital Tools to Population Health Research.” Bulletin of the World Health Organization 98 (4): 239–44. https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.19.237370.Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, B., T. Ross-Hellauer, X. van Edig, and E. C. Moylan. 2018. “Ten Considerations for Open Peer Review.” F1000Res 7: 969. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15334.1.Search in Google Scholar
Schouppe, M., and C. Burgelman. 2018. “Relevance of the EOSC Initiative and FAIR Principles in the Realm of Open Science and Implementation Phases of the EOSC.” In Proceedings of the XX International Conference. Moscow.Search in Google Scholar
Sharif, N., W. Ritter, R. L. Davidson, and S. C. Edmunds. 2018. “An Open Science ‘state of the Art’ for Hong Kong: Making Open Research Data Available to Support Hong Kong Innovation Policy.” Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia 17 (2): 200–21. https://doi.org/10.17477/jcea.2018.17.2.200.Search in Google Scholar
Sharma, G. 2014. “Transforming Open Access Scholarly Publishing and Acientific Delivery: Challenges and Opportunities in Asian Regions.” Research Journal of Information Technology 6 (4): 413–26. https://doi.org/10.3923/rjit.2014.413.426.Search in Google Scholar
Shelley-Egan, C., M. D. Gjefsen, and R. Nydal. 2020. “Consolidating RRI and Open Science: Understanding the Potential for Transformative Change.” Life Sciences, Society and Policy 16 (1): 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-020-00103-5.Search in Google Scholar
Soergel, D., A. Saunders, and A. McCallum. 2013. “Open Scholarship and Peer Review: A Time for Experimentation.” In Proceedings of the 30 the International Conference on Machine Learning. Atlanta.Search in Google Scholar
Steel, K. M., H. Thompson, and W. Wright. 2019. “Opportunities for Intra-university Collaborations in the New Research Environment.” Higher Education Research and Development 38 (3): 638–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1549537.Search in Google Scholar
Sullivan, I., A. Dehaven, and D. Mellor. 2019. “Open and Reproducible Research on Open Science Framework.” Current Protocols in Essential Laboratory Techniques 18 (1). https://doi.org/10.1002/cpet.32.Search in Google Scholar
Syed, M. 2020. “The Promise of the Open Science Movement for Research on Identity.” Identity 20 (3): 143–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/15283488.2020.1781635.Search in Google Scholar
Tai, T. C., and J. P. W. Robinson. 2018. “Enhancing Climate Change Research with Open Science.” Frontiers in Environmental Science 6 (OCT). https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2018.00115.Search in Google Scholar
Tennant, J., J. Beamer, J. Bosman, B. Brembs, N. C. Chung, G. Clement, T. Crick, J. Dugan, A. Dunning, and D. Eccles. 2019. “Foundations for Open Scholarship Strategy Development (Version 2.1 – Completed Revised Second Draft (January 31, 2019)).” Open Scholarship Strategy. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/b4v8p.Search in Google Scholar
Thelwall, M., L. Allen, E. R. Papas, Z. Nyakoojo, and V. Weigert. 2020. “Does the Use of Open, Non-anonymous Peer Review in Scholarly Publishing Introduce Bias? Evidence from the F1000 Research Post-publication Open Peer Review Publishing Model.” Journal of Information Science 0165-5515: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551520938678.Search in Google Scholar
Thorogood, A. 2018. “Canada: Will Privacy Rules Continue to Favour Open Science?” Human Genetics 137 (8): 595–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-018-1905-0.Search in Google Scholar
Toelch, U., and D. Ostwald. 2018. “Digital Open Science—Teaching Digital Tools for Reproducible and Transparent Research.” PLoS Biology 16 (7): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006022.Search in Google Scholar
Toth, A. A., G. C. Banks, D. Mellor, E. H. O’Boyle, A. Dickson, D. J. Davis, A. DeHaven, J. Bochantin, and J. Borns. 2020. “Study Preregistration: An Evaluation of a Method for Transparent Reporting.” Journal of Business and Psychology 36 (4): 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-020-09695-3.Search in Google Scholar
Tucker, J. D., S. Day, W. M. Tang, and B. Bayus. 2019. “Crowdsourcing in Medical Research: Concepts and Applications.” PeerJ 7: 17. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6762.Search in Google Scholar
van Dijk, W., C. Schatschneider, and S. A. Hart. 2020. “Open Science in Education Sciences.” Journal of Learning Disabilities 52 (2): 139–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420945267.Search in Google Scholar
Vassar, M., S. Jellison, H. Wendelbo, and C. Wayant. 2020. “Data Sharing Practices in Randomized Trials of Addiction Interventions.” Addictive Behaviors 102: 106193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106193.Search in Google Scholar
Vermeir, K., S. Leonelli, A. S. Bin Tariq, S. Olatunbosun Sojinu, A. Ocloo, A. Islam Khan, and L. Bezuidenhout. 2018. Global Access to Research Software: The Forgotten Pillar of Open Science Implementation. Berlin: German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina.Search in Google Scholar
Vicente-Saez, R., R. Gustafsson, and L. Van den Brande. 2020. “The Dawn of an Open Exploration Era: Emergent Principles and Practices of Open Science and Innovation of University Research Teams in a Digital World.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 156 (120037). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120037.Search in Google Scholar
Vico, E. 2020. “San Francisco Statement of DORA Research Assessment: Putting Science in Research Evaluation.” Cic-Cuadernos De Informacion Y Comunicacion 25: 279–83. https://doi.org/10.5209/ciyc.68944.Search in Google Scholar
Waithira, N., B. Mutinda, and P. Y. Cheah. 2019. “Data Management and Sharing Policy: The First Step towards Promoting Data Sharing.” BMC Medicine 17 (1): 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1315-8.Search in Google Scholar
Wehn, U., C. Gobel, A. Bowser, L. Hepburn, and M. Haklay. 2020. “Global Citizen Science Perspectives on Open Science.” In The CSGP Citizen Science & Open Science Community of Practice to the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. Australia: UNESCO.Search in Google Scholar
Willmes, C., D. Becker, J. Verheul, Y. Yener, M. Zickel, A. Bolten, O. Bubenzer, and G. Bareth. 2016. “An Open Science Approach to Gis-Based Paleoenvironment Data.” In ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, III-2. Gottingen: ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences.10.5194/isprsannals-III-2-159-2016Search in Google Scholar
Wittman, J. T., and B. H. Aukema. 2020. “A Guide and Toolbox to Replicability and Open Science in Entomology.” Journal of Insect Science 20 (3): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/ieaa036.Search in Google Scholar
Wolfram, D., P. Wang, A. Hembree, and H. Park. 2020. “Open Peer Review: Promoting Transparency in Open Science.” Scientometrics 125 (2): 1033–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03488-4.Search in Google Scholar
Xafis, V., and M. K. Labude. 2019. “Openness in Big Data and Data Repositories: The Application of an Ethics Framework for Big Data in Health and Research.” Asian Bioethics Review 11 (3): 255–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41649-019-00097-z.Search in Google Scholar
Yu, X., C. J. Duffy, A. N. Rousseau, G. Bhatt, Á. Á. Pardo, and D. Charron. 2016. “Open Science in Practice: Learning Integrated Modeling of Coupled Surface-subsurface Flow Processes from Scratch.” Earth and Space Science 3 (5): 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015EA000155.Search in Google Scholar
Zhu, Y. 2015. “Do New Forms of Scholarly Communication Provide a Pathway to Open Science?” In Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, School of Social Sciences: The University of Manchester (United Kingdom). EBSCOhost.Search in Google Scholar
Zhu, Y. 2017. “Who Support Open Access Publishing? Gender, Discipline, Seniority and Other Factors Associated with Academics’ OA Practice.” Scientometrics 111 (2): 557–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2316-z.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
