After 10 Years, ‘Many Labs’ Comes to an End – But Its Success Is Replicable

“Ten years ago, mindful of the trend of research being increasingly generated, but not increasingly revisited, Nosek and colleagues decided to re-run a series of published scientific experiments, creating the “Many Labs” project. The global effort, which at times has been both headline-grabbing and apple cart-turning, wrapped up at the end of April….”

News – Call for Special Collections!

“The Open Library of Humanities journal (OLHJ) is currently seeking new Special Collections to join our wide array of published research in the Humanities.  

OLHJ has published quality, peer-reviewed research across 40 Special Collections since 2016, with subjects ranging from ‘The Working-Class Avant-Garde’, to ‘Representing Classical Music in the Twenty-First Century’, and more recently ‘The Politics and History of Menstruation: Contextualising the Scottish campaign to End Period Poverty’. 

There are many benefits of publishing a Special Collection with OLHJ, including: ….”

Assessing Open Science practices in physical activity behaviour change intervention evaluations | BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine

Abstract:  Objectives Concerns on the lack of reproducibility and transparency in science have led to a range of research practice reforms, broadly referred to as ‘Open Science’. The extent that physical activity interventions are embedding Open Science practices is currently unknown. In this study, we randomly sampled 100 reports of recent physical activity randomised controlled trial behaviour change interventions to estimate the prevalence of Open Science practices.

Methods One hundred reports of randomised controlled trial physical activity behaviour change interventions published between 2018 and 2021 were identified, as used within the Human Behaviour-Change Project. Open Science practices were coded in identified reports, including: study pre-registration, protocol sharing, data, materials and analysis scripts sharing, replication of a previous study, open access publication, funding sources and conflict of interest statements. Coding was performed by two independent researchers, with inter-rater reliability calculated using Krippendorff’s alpha.

Results 78 of the 100 reports provided details of study pre-registration and 41% provided evidence of a published protocol. 4% provided accessible open data, 8% provided open materials and 1% provided open analysis scripts. 73% of reports were published as open access and no studies were described as replication attempts. 93% of reports declared their sources of funding and 88% provided conflicts of interest statements. A Krippendorff’s alpha of 0.73 was obtained across all coding.

Conclusion Open data, materials, analysis and replication attempts are currently rare in physical activity behaviour change intervention reports, whereas funding source and conflict of interest declarations are common. Future physical activity research should increase the reproducibility of their methods and results by incorporating more Open Science practices.

Everything old is new again | University of Michigan Library

“A century ago, amid the political upheaval and humanitarian crises that followed World War I, U-M professor of Latin language and literature Frances Willey Kelsey traveled to Constantinople (now Istanbul). In a shop in the Old City, he purchased the first item of what would become the largest collection of Greek manuscripts in America, which now encompasses more than 100 bound manuscripts and fragments spanning the 4th to the 19th centuries. 

Each of the collection’s items is unique — all written by hand, some illuminated, and some incorporating elaborate bindings. Taken together, they’re a rich source of information about the transmission of Christian texts, manuscript illumination, and historical bookmaking,  especially in the late Byzantine Empire.

Pablo Alvarez, curator in the library’s Special Collections Research Center, has been responsible for the Greek manuscripts since arriving at the library in 2010, and he describes it as one of the highlights of his work. 

Now, a new exhibit created by Alvarez — live in the Hatcher Library through June 28, and also available online — celebrates the collection’s centenary by shedding light on its history and provenance, and by displaying some of its most beautiful and interesting items. …”

How to start a replication crisis | Nature Reviews Psychology

“It takes 270 psychologists, 100 study findings, and four years to start a replication crisis. Or at least these were the ingredients of the Reproducibility Project: Psychology, published in 2015. This project responded to widespread concerns that many psychological findings might be false-positives and that the reported effects therefore do not actually exist. The goal of the Reproducibility Project was to test whether these concerns were well-founded by estimating the replicability of psychological science….

A more positive view of the Reproducibility Project and its findings has developed over recent years. Many scholars believe that the Reproducibility Project and similar efforts led researchers to finally acknowledge that there was a problem. These replication efforts sparked a transformation of psychological science towards more openness and transparency. For example, many researchers now preregister their studies and make their data and materials publicly available. Consequently, some scholars argue that psychological research is now more credible and productive than ever….”

The Bookseller – News – Emerald Publishing partners with Knowledge Unlatched for e-book collection

“Emerald Publishing has partnered with Knowledge Unlatched (KU) to create and promote an Open Access e-book collection in business management and economics. 

The exclusive deal starts from 2023 and is the first Open Access partnership of its kind for the publisher within its e-books portfolio.  

All book titles in the “Emerald Publishing – Responsible Management and the SDGs” package will also focus on responding to and achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with a particular focus on SDGs on decent work and economic growth; industry, innovation and infrastructure; and responsible consumption and production. 

Titles will cover themes such as diversity, inclusion and gender and racial equity in the workplace, sustainable tourism and ending forced labour, and how businesses of all sizes are working towards SDGs. …”

Merit Review Policy – [U of Maryland, Psychology Department]

“Examples of specific evaluative criteria to be used in merit review, based on professional standards for evaluating faculty performance….Openness and transparency: Degree to which research, data, procedures, code, and research products are made openly available where appropriate; the use of registered reports or pre-registration. Committee should recognize that researchers may not be able to share some types of data, such as when data are proprietary or subject to ethical concerns over confidentiality[7, 1, 6, 2, 5] These limitations should be documented by faculty.”

 

Leslie Chan: Is Open Scholarship Possible without Open Infrastructure? – Digital Humanities Summer Institute | 7 June 2022

“Abstract: Recently, several collaborators and I submitted a chapter proposal in response to a call for submission to a volume on critical infrastructure studies and digital humanities. The editors did not accept our proposal. They cited the high number of submissions and the “word limit” specified by the university press contracted for the volume as the reason. In this talk, I like to reflect on how networked possibilities (the multimodal forms of scholarly artifacts and modes of engagements) are still being dictated by the properties of print and it’s associated academic capital. In the meantime, much of the critical infrastructures necessary for networked open scholarship are increasingly being designed and controlled by a small handful of multinational corporate publishers turned data analytics cartel. The creation of end-to-end knowledge production and evaluation platform and its inscribed logic of data extraction has enormous implications for our aspirations for open scholarship, particularly for early career scholars. We may still be focused on infrastructures as the object of study, but we should be more concerned with how infrastructures govern our labour and scholarly practices and, above all, our autonomy. The talk will provide suggestions on how best to design community governance over infrastructure, instead of being governed by infrastructures not by our design.”

Open Access: Koste es, was es wolle?

Abstract:  The paper introduces the recommendations of German Science and Humanities Council on the transformation of academic publishing towards Open Access, pinpointing core aspects. The key points will illustrate why, 20 years on, these recommendations are indicative of a lack of genuine transformation, and may explain why change has not happened despite the manifold efforts made by libraries. The article also outlines promising aspects that nonetheless may require a long-term view most of the parties involved might not be ready to take.

News – OLH annual report 2021

“The Open Library of Humanities is an award-winning, academic-led, diamond open-access publisher of 28 journals based in the Department of English, Theatre and Creative Writing at Birkbeck, University of London. We are part of a community of scholar-led, community-owned and non-profit publishing ecosystem that are exploring different business models and innovative approaches to open access publishing that are adapted to the needs, in this case, of academics in the humanities. The platform was launched in 2015 by Birkbeck academics Professor Martin Eve and Dr Caroline Edwards and has been operating as an independent charity until May 2021, which is when the platform merged with the university. The decision to merge was taken, specifically, to protect the “academic-led” quality of the organisation and to protect the charity from financial and personnel risks.

With initial funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and subsequent support from Arcadia, a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Professor Peter Baldwin, the platform currently covers its costs by payments from an international library consortium, rather than any author fee. This funding mechanism enables equitable open access in the humanities disciplines, with charges neither to readers nor authors….

Part of the OLH model that makes it so appealing lies in our journal ‘flipping’ programme, where we have sought to convert existing subscription titles to an open access model without fees. In September 2021 OLH re-opened its journal flipping programme and remains open to expressions of interest from subscription journals in the humanities seeking to move to a gold open access (OA) publishing model without author-facing charges (‘diamond’ OA). …”

Supporting Ukrainian Editorial Staff: Crowdfunding Campaign

The invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 and the expansion of the war zone across the country have had a significant impact on the country’s scientific activity. Much civilian infrastructure has been destroyed, including higher education and research institutions.

Through a number of programmes, such as Science for Ukraine, support is being provided to Ukrainian researchers, but this support has not been extended to staff working alongside researchers in knowledge generation: the librarians, editors, technicians, and administrative staff at universities, research institutes, and other infrastructures.

Yet preserving the knowledge, expertise, and knowledge-sharing capabilities of these scientific communities is of vital importance.

What can we do to help?

Supporting Ukrainian Editorial Staff (SUES) is an initiative by various European institutions, infrastructures, and organizations (Institute of Literary Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences [IBL-PAN], OPERAS, Directory of Open Access Journals [DOAJ], Directory of Open Access Books [DOAB], Electronic Information for Libraries [EIFL], Association of European University Presses [AEUP]), as well as a number of French scientific publishers, aimed at supporting scientific communication in Ukraine and helping scholarly journals and academic publishers to continue their publishing activities.

Did you know that there are more than 1,000 academic journals in Ukraine? Over 700 of these are open access journals published via the URAN platform. The publication of academic books is also extensive, with more than 20 Ukrainian university presses currently distributed via the CEEOL portal. These publications, in fields ranging from physics to literature via history, sociology, and biology, are key vehicles for the communication of knowledge generated by Ukrainian researchers. The editors, reviewers, typesetters, proofreaders, translators, and technical and administrative staff working in the various publishing centres need your support to continue their mission: to share and disseminate knowledge.

A questionnaire is being circulated around Ukrainian journals and publishers to help accurately identify their needs in terms of financial and technical support. The requests received so far relate primarily to remuneration for editorial work, to enable them to continue their work and to publish the next issue of their journal or their next book. The purpose of this campaign is to help 10 journals or publishers to keep publishing. In the long term, the project is also aimed at strengthening relationships and exchanging knowledge to ensure the international presence and visibility of Ukrainian academic publishers. Thanks to your contribution, Ukrainian scholarly journals and scientific publishers will be able to continue sharing knowledge.

A crowdfunding campaign is being run from Wednesday, 4 May to Monday, 6 June 2022, to raise money to help Ukrainian journals who have requested assistance from the coalition. Unique compensation will be offered in return for any financial support offered.

Link to the crowdfunding webpage: https://wemakeit.com/projects/support-to-ukrainian-editors

Contacts

Widespread use of National Academies consensus reports by the American public | PNAS

Significance

Advocates for open access argue that people need scientific information, although they lack evidence for this. Using Google’s recently developed deep learning natural language processing model, which offers unrivalled comprehension of subtle differences in meaning, 1.6 million people downloading National Academies reports were classified, not just into broad categories such as researchers and teachers but also precisely delineated small groups such as hospital chaplains, veterans, and science fiction authors. The results reveal adults motivated to seek out the most credible sources, engage with challenging material, use it to improve the services they provide, and learn more about the world they live in. The picture contrasts starkly with the dominant narrative of a misinformed and manipulated public targeted by social media.

Abstract

In seeking to understand how to protect the public information sphere from corruption, researchers understandably focus on dysfunction. However, parts of the public information ecosystem function very well, and understanding this as well will help in protecting and developing existing strengths. Here, we address this gap, focusing on public engagement with high-quality science-based information, consensus reports of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). Attending to public use is important to justify public investment in producing and making freely available high-quality, scientifically based reports. We deploy Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), a high-performing, supervised machine learning model, to classify 1.6 million comments left by US downloaders of National Academies reports responding to a prompt asking how they intended to use the report. The results provide detailed, nationwide evidence of how the public uses open access scientifically based information. We find half of reported use to be academic—research, teaching, or studying. The other half reveals adults across the country seeking the highest-quality information to improve how they do their job, to help family members, to satisfy their curiosity, and to learn. Our results establish the existence of demand for high-quality information by the public and that such knowledge is widely deployed to improve provision of services. Knowing the importance of such information, policy makers can be encouraged to protect it.