Survey on Open Science Practices in Functional Neuroimaging – ScienceDirect

Abstract:  Replicability and reproducibility of scientific findings is paramount for sustainable progress in neuroscience. Preregistration of the hypotheses and methods of an empirical study before analysis, the sharing of primary research data, and compliance with data standards such as the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS), are considered effective practices to secure progress and to substantiate quality of research. We investigated the current level of adoption of open science practices in neuroimaging and the difficulties that prevent researchers from using them.

Email invitations to participate in the survey were sent to addresses received through a PubMed search of human functional magnetic resonance imaging studies that were published between 2010 and 2020. 283 persons completed the questionnaire.

Although half of the participants were experienced with preregistration, the willingness to preregister studies in the future was modest. The majority of participants had experience with the sharing of primary neuroimaging data. Most of the participants were interested in implementing a standardized data structure such as BIDS in their labs. Based on demographic variables, we compared participants on seven subscales, which had been generated through factor analysis. Exploratory analyses found that experienced researchers at lower career level had higher fear of being transparent and researchers with residence in the EU had a higher need for data governance. Additionally, researchers at medical faculties as compared to other university faculties reported a more unsupportive supervisor with regards to open science practices and a higher need for data governance.

The results suggest growing adoption of open science practices but also highlight a number of important impediments.

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….”

UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science – Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU

“In late 2021, the UNESCO General Assembly approved a new Recommendation on Open Science. All the member states agreed on a final version, that for the first time provides an official definition of what open science is, and that calls for legal and policy changes in favor of open science. As a recommendation is the strongest policy tool of UNESCO, “intended to influence the development of national laws and practices”, this is important news for the entire scientific community. 

The recommendation presents a framework on, and principles for, open science. It aims to build a common understanding on the topic, and calls for publicly funded research to be aligned with the principles: transparency, scrutiny, critique and reproducibility; equality of opportunities; responsibility, respect and accountability; collaboration, participation and inclusion; flexibility, and sustainability. 

It asks for more dialogue between the public and the private sector, and for new, innovative means and methods to be developed for open science. Finally, the recommendation stresses the importance of citizen science and crowdsourcing, and the need for cooperation between different kinds of actors, nationally and internationally.

In Sweden, the recommendation is currently being discussed with stakeholders. A few weeks ago, Wikimedia Sverige was invited by the Swedish National UNESCO Commission to a round table conversation on the subject. Other than Wikimedia Sverige, organisations and institutions such as the Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions, the Swedish Research Council, the Ministry for Education and the National Library, took part – many of those who will bear the largest responsibility for putting the recommendations in practice. …”

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.

Open Science for Non-Specialists: Making Open Science Meaningful Beyond the Scientific Community | Philosophy of Science | Cambridge Core

Abstract:  A major goal of the open science movement is to make more scientific information available to non-specialists, but it has been difficult to meaningfully achieve that goal. In response, this paper argues for two steps: (1) focusing on the scientific content that is most relevant to non-specialist audiences; and (2) packaging that content in meaningful ways for those audiences. The paper uses a case study involving a major environmental health issue (namely, PFAS pollution) to illustrate how the proponents of open science can work with groups like government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and extension programs to implement these two steps.

 

How Does Citizen Science Change Us? | UCL Institute for Global Prosperity – UCL – University College London

“On 6 April, the Institute for Global Prosperity (IGP) hosted a session at UCL’s Open Science conference. The session asked, ‘How Does Citizen Science Change Us?’, and was dedicated to understanding how Citizen Science (CS) impacts individual citizens, academics and policy makers, as well as wider society. The event also marked the launch of the IGP’s Citizen Science Academy in partnership with the UCL Office for Open Science and Scholarship. The Academy delivers training to citizen researchers in qualitative data collection methods, and provides a theoretical grounding and practical support to citizens researching local pathways to prosperity in their neighbourhoods. …

Open science is about opening access of research to wider audiences. One of the benefits being the ability to bridge the gap between local people and policymakers. ‘How does Citizen Science Change us?’ was an amazing example of this.”

Community workshop to respond to UNESCO’s global call for best practices in open science

“Further to the adoption of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science in November 2021, UNESCO is launching a Global Call for Best Practices in Open Science. This call aims to collect best practices in open science at individual, institutional, national, regional, and international levels with a particular focus on the seven priority areas of action highlighted in the Recommendation.

Invest in Open Infrastructure (IOI) has been working to conduct research to provide strategic support and investment guidance to funders, budget holders, policymakers, and other stakeholders on investing in open infrastructure for scholarship and research. To this end, we wish to work with our community to contribute to this Global Call, to gather our experiences to identify best practices in supporting, adopting, using, and contributing to open infrastructure.

To this end, we are collaborating with the Turing Way, the Tools, Practices & Systems (TPS) Programme at the Alan Turing Institute, and Open Life Science to create a series of three 90-min community workshops. Each workshop is hosted by a hosting organization/initiative and will focus on one or two priority areas of action that is/are most central to that community’s work. We invite everyone interested in learning more about others’ practices in supporting open science and open infrastructure to participate in our workshops to contribute to a community response to the UNESCO call.

Wednesday 8 June 2022, 10-11:30 am EDT (see this in your time zone): On “investing in open science infrastructures and services“ hosted by IOI; register here

Wednesday 15 June 2022, 10-11:30 am EDT (see this in your time zone): On “promoting innovative approaches for open science at different stages of the scientific process“ and “promoting international and multi-stakeholder cooperation in the context of open science and with a view to reducing digital, technological and knowledge gaps” hosted by the Turing Way and the TPS Programme; register here

Wednesday 22 June 2022, 10-11:30 am EDT (see this in your time zone): On “investing in human resources, training, education, digital literacy and capacity building for open science“ and, “fostering a culture of open science and aligning incentives for open science” hosted by Open Life Science; register here

We will draft a community response to the UNESCO call based on the input from the session and will share our response publicly upon submission….”

Transform to Open Science (TOPS) Curriculum Development Team

“Open science  —  opening up the scientific process from idea inception to result — increases access to knowledge and expands opportunities for new voices to participate. Sharing the data, code, and knowledge associated with the scientific process lowers barriers to entry, enables findings to be more easily reproduced, generates new knowledge at scale, and allows and facilitates diverse societal uses.

AGU and NASA have made a commitment to advancing the principles of open science to build a more inclusive and open community at NASA, AGU and beyond. This is a resolution to work towards a more transparent and collaborative scientific progress, opening data and results to the broader public whenever possible, and incentivizing researchers around the globe to do the same.

To help catalyze and support the cultural change necessary for such an opening of scientific knowledge, NASA has launched the Open-Source Science Initiative (OSSI), a long-term commitment to open science. To spark change and inspire open science engagement, OSSI has created the Transform to Open Science (TOPS) mission and declared 2023 as the Year Of Open Science.

A key goal of TOPS is to engage thousands of researchers in open science leading practices.

Launching a program such as TOPS is possible thanks to the open science communities’ work over the last couple of decades. TOPS would like to leverage this work in developing a five-part curriculum on open science.  We seek participation from individuals actively engaging with open science communities, open software and data, and related practices to serve on a TOPS Curriculum Development Team. This will include participation in a series of virtual meetings and sprints this year. For those selected to lead module development, there will also be in-person working sessions at AGU’s headquarters in Washington, DC. AGU, in partnership with NASA and experts in curriculum development, will coordinate this effort.  All content will be openly shared….”

Solving medicine’s data bottleneck: Nightingale Open Science | Nature Medicine

“Open datasets, curated around unsolved medical problems, are vital to the development of computational research in medicine, but remain in short supply. Nightingale Open Science, a non-profit computing platform, was founded to catalyse research in this nascent field….”

New Instructions to Authors Emphasize Open Science, Transparency, Full Reporting of Sociodemographic Characteristics of the Sample, and Avoidance of Piecemeal Publication | Annals of Behavioral Medicine | Oxford Academic

“We have updated our Author guidelines to more fully reflect the journal’s values and to better align manuscript reporting practices with scientific ideals for open transparency, open science, and contextualization. Accordingly, we are adding a number of new requirements for manuscript submission to Annals of Behavioral Medicine. The updated Author Guidelines (https://academic.oup.com/abm/pages/General_Instructions) describe them in full detail. Here, we briefly summarize some of the most important changes.”

Frequently Asked Questions, Open Science Europe

“These pages are updated with the answers to the most frequent questions that have been submitted to the Research Enquiry Service and Participant Validation, IT Helpdesk, eProcurement Helpdesk, Call Coordinators and Horizon Europe NCP correspondents….”

Job: Open Research Co-ordinator, Appl. deadline: June 12, 2022. | King’s College London

Job ID: 046346 Salary: £33,114 – £37,804 per annum, including London Weighting Allowance Posted: 16-May-2022 Closing date: 12-Jun-2022

About the Role

Open Research is an innovative and fast growing area of service provision, working collaboratively with internal and external HE partners to bring about far reaching positive changes to the scholarly dissemination ecosystem of researchers, funders, and publishers. We are recruiting for a second Open Research Co-ordinator to provide support across the team, helping to advance the open agenda for the benefit of researchers, students, and the general public. 

You will work closely with the managers in the team, supporting them with service provision around scholarly subscriptions, open access publishing, and research data management. You will help to co-ordinate and supervise the work of Senior Library Assistants and Library Assistants, guiding and supporting them. You will play a particularly important role in conducting data analysis and producing insights from that data, to assess and help implement alternative, sustainable models for journal subscriptions and OA publishing.  

Along with all members of L&C, you will be required to participate in some frontline service delivery, including contributing towards a rota for evening and weekend working.

This is a really exciting opportunity for candidates looking to work within open research – whether as a step-up or sideways move from another area, who wish to utilise their skills in co-ordinating tasks and people, manipulating and understanding data, and constructive problem solving. Experience/ expertise in open access publishing, research data management, or subscriptions management  would be advantageous.  

We encourage applications from candidates who have experience from both within and outside of the Higher Education sector where they can demonstrate the skills needed to succeed in this role.

This post will be offered on an indefinite contract.

This is a full-time post. We welcome applications from candidates seeking a flexible work pattern within our necessary service operating hours.