Ten simple rules for improving communication among scientists | PLOS Computational Biology

Abstract:  Communication is a fundamental part of scientific development and methodology. With the advancement of the internet and social networks, communication has become rapid and sometimes overwhelming, especially in science. It is important to provide scientists with useful, effective, and dynamic tools to establish and build a fluid communication framework that allows for scientific advancement. Therefore, in this article, we present advice and recommendations that can help promote and improve science communication while respecting an adequate balance in the degree of commitment toward collaborative work. We have developed 10 rules shown in increasing order of commitment that are grouped into 3 key categories: (1) speak (based on active participation); (2) join (based on joining scientific groups); and (3) assess (based on the analysis and retrospective consideration of the weaknesses and strengths). We include examples and resources that provide actionable strategies for involvement and engagement with science communication, from basic steps to more advanced, introspective, and long-term commitments. Overall, we aim to help spread science from within and encourage and engage scientists to become involved in science communication effectively and dynamically.

 

 

Octopus: The New Primary Research Record for Science

“Octopus is a new platform, launching in spring 2022, which is designed to be the new primary research record for science. Instead of being a platform for the publication of papers, it is designed for easy and rapid sharing and assessing of work, in smaller units. Octopus will be where researchers can record every piece of work that they have done, as they do it, to assert their priority and for it to be assessed and critiqued by their peers. Octopus has a unique structure to encourage a collaborative approach to the scientific process, with publications building on each other over time, regardless of authorship. In this talk, its creator will explain more about how it will work, and why it was designed the way it was.”

Building Data Resilience Through Collaborative Networks | Educopia Institute

“The aim of this symposium is to share information and best practices on the opportunities, challenges, models, methodologies, successes, and collaborative strategies concerning data sharing for digital scholarship, science, and community formation more broadly. The broad audience addressed will include faculty, librarians, technologists, and university administrators interested in these topics….”

Octopus: creating a new primary research record for science | Jisc

“Octopus will create a new ‘primary research record’ for recording and appraising research ‘as it happens’.

It breaks down the publication of scientific research into eight elements, unlike a traditional journal article.

The eight elements are:

Problem
Hypothesis/rationale
Methods/protocol
Data/results
Analysis
Interpretation
Real-world implementation
Peer review

These elements will be linked together to form chains of collaborative work.

These smaller units of publication encourage faster sharing, and credit can be given to individual work at all stages of the research process, including peer review.

This will encourage a new culture of collaboration, constructive critique and fast sharing of work by resetting the incentive structure in research to reward best practice in every aspect of the scientific process.

The platform will be free for researchers to publish their work, free for anyone to read and embeds the principles of openness and transparency throughout….”

New Initiative Incentivizes Open Research | The Scientist Magazine®

“A large coalition of colleges and universities aims to change hiring, promotion, and tenure practices to reward collaboration….

As Bahlai’s experience shows, scientists aren’t always rewarded for conducting research in accordance with open science principles. A new initiative plans to change that. The Higher Education Leadership Initiative for Open Scholarship, or HELIOS, which launched this March, is a coalition of more than 75 member colleges and universities that have committed to fostering open science practices, including through their hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions….

“The scientists bought into it,” Yamamoto says, adding that he doesn’t blame Lewin for coming up with an innovative marketing strategy. The journals wouldn’t have succeeded in shifting the culture if the scientific community hadn’t bought into the concepts of prestige and status, he says.

 

Yamamoto says this competition to publish work in prestigious journals led to an emphasis on individual contributions over collaboration in academia today. For example, tenure committees heavily weigh publication as a first or senior author, especially in prestigious journals—a process that can take several years, delaying when others have access to advances in scientific knowledge, he says. Yamamoto says it’s also common for committees to completely disregard papers where the tenure candidate is listed as a middle author.

Those individualistic values aren’t limited to universities and colleges. Grant agencies, for example, may decide to deny funding to a group of researchers if they get scooped by another team investigating a similar problem, Yamamoto says.

 

“So those kinds of values and practices then serve a very strong disincentive for an investigator to practice open science,” he says….

HELIOS wants to bend academia’s incentive structures toward cultivating collaboration. To accomplish this, like-minded institutions have gathered several times since 2021—beginning with a roundtable discussion convened by the National Academy of Sciences—to discuss priorities and strategies. The proceedings of a 2021 member workshop, “Developing a Toolkit for Open Science Practices,” includes language that institutions can use to show students and faculty their commitment to open science. The toolkit also includes templates for evaluating open science practices in job and tenure applications with example criteria including publishing in open-access journals, posting data using FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable) principles, and sharing other research outputs such as computer code….

Mangravite says she “one hundred percent” sees this divide between senior and junior faculty. But she says that rather than waiting for older faculty to retire, what’s needed is to incentivize younger faculty to participate in open science now instead of continuing to hold them to traditional standards set by more senior academics….”

 

Participatory Mapping: A Systematic Review and Open Science Framework for Future Research | Research Explorer | The University of Manchester

Abstract:  Participatory Mapping emerged from a need for more inclusive methods of collecting spatial data with the intention of democratising the decision-making process. It encompasses a range of methods including mental mapping, sketch mapping and Participatory GIS. Whilst there has been a rapid increase in uptake of Participatory Mapping, the multidisciplinary nature of the field has resulted in a lack of consistency in the conducting and reporting of research, limiting further development. In this paper we argue that an Open Science approach is required to enable the field to advance, increasing transparency and replicability in the way Participatory Mapping research is both conducted and reported. This argument is supported by the first large-scale systematic review of the field, which identifies specific areas within Participatory Mapping that would benefit from an Open Science approach. Four questions are used to explore the sample: (1) How are different Participatory Mapping methods being used and reported? (2) What information is given on the data collected through Participatory Mapping? (3) How are participant demographics being recorded? (4) Who is conducting the research and where is it being published? From a total of 578 academic research articles, we analysed a stratified sample of 117. The review reveals a significant lack of reporting on key details in the data collection process, restricting the transparency, replicability, and transferability of Participatory Mapping research and demonstrating the urgent need for an Open Science approach. Recommendations are then drawn from the results to guide the design of future Participatory Mapping research.

 

The LOTUS initiative for open knowledge management in natural products research | eLife

Abstract:  Contemporary bioinformatic and chemoinformatic capabilities hold promise to reshape knowledge management, analysis and interpretation of data in natural products research. Currently, reliance on a disparate set of non-standardized, insular, and specialized databases presents a series of challenges for data access, both within the discipline and for integration and interoperability between related fields. The fundamental elements of exchange are referenced structure-organism pairs that establish relationships between distinct molecular structures and the living organisms from which they were identified. Consolidating and sharing such information via an open platform has strong transformative potential for natural products research and beyond. This is the ultimate goal of the newly established LOTUS initiative, which has now completed the first steps toward the harmonization, curation, validation and open dissemination of 750,000+ referenced structure-organism pairs. LOTUS data is hosted on Wikidata and regularly mirrored on https://lotus.naturalproducts.net. Data sharing within the Wikidata framework broadens data access and interoperability, opening new possibilities for community curation and evolving publication models. Furthermore, embedding LOTUS data into the vast Wikidata knowledge graph will facilitate new biological and chemical insights. The LOTUS initiative represents an important advancement in the design and deployment of a comprehensive and collaborative natural products knowledge base.

 

Open science for enabling reproducible, ethical and collaborative research: Insights from The Turing Way | Zenodo

Abstract:  In this talk, I discuss open science as a framework to ensure that all our research components can be easily accessed, openly examined and built upon by others. I will introduce The Turing Way – an open source, open collaboration and community-driven guide to reproducible, ethical and inclusive data science and research. Drawing insights from the project, I will share best practices that researchers should integrate to ensure the highest reproducible and ethical standards from the start of their projects so that their research work is easy to reuse and reproduce at all stages of the development. All attendees will leave the talk understanding the many dimensions of openness and how they can participate in an inclusive, kind and inspiring open source ecosystem as they collaboratively seek to improve research culture. All questions and contributions are welcome at the GitHub repository: https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way.

 

An Open-Publishing Response to the COVID-19 Infodemic – PMC

Abstract:  The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed the rapid dissemination of papers and preprints investigating the disease and its associated virus, SARS-CoV-2. The multifaceted nature of COVID-19 demands a multidisciplinary approach, but the urgency of the crisis combined with the need for social distancing measures present unique challenges to collaborative science. We applied a massive online open publishing approach to this problem using Manubot. Through GitHub, collaborators summarized and critiqued COVID-19 literature, creating a review manuscript. Manubot automatically compiled citation information for referenced preprints, journal publications, websites, and clinical trials. Continuous integration workflows retrieved up-to-date data from online sources nightly, regenerating some of the manuscript’s figures and statistics. Manubot rendered the manuscript into PDF, HTML, LaTeX, and DOCX outputs, immediately updating the version available online upon the integration of new content. Through this effort, we organized over 50 scientists from a range of backgrounds who evaluated over 1,500 sources and developed seven literature reviews. While many efforts from the computational community have focused on mining COVID-19 literature, our project illustrates the power of open publishing to organize both technical and non-technical scientists to aggregate and disseminate information in response to an evolving crisis.

Collaboration across open science education: working towards a FAIR and open future – EOSC synergy

“Two years ago, the EOSC Synergy project presented at the Open Education Conference (OER20) outlining our aim to contribute to the development of a sustainable infrastructure for open learning in the European Open Science Cloud. 

Today we are presenting again at OER22 in London, providing an update on the project, but even more importantly providing a story of collaboration across the open science education and training world, bringing together communities from different countries, roles and disciplines.  

These collaborations enabled EOSC Synergy to situate its activities in a global network linked by a shared aim of working towards making open and FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Re-usable) principles the norm for research, but also for research training and education.  

The collaborations provide many examples of the conference theme ‘open in action’ and focus on different areas of openness: from community building and sharing practice across different parts of the open science education community, to creating shared resources and joining up infrastructure and resources. 

This presentation reflects on the nature of the collaborations and lessons learned, presenting details of their outputs and future plans. We aim to raise awareness of these activities and build further bridges between the open education and open science communities. In this post we highlight a selection of collaborations EOSC Synergy has been involved in focussing on open science training and education. …”

Building stronger infrastructures to support open access books: LYRASIS, DOAB and OAPEN | Directory of Open Access Books

In 2021, DOAB and OAPEN entered into a new partnership with LYRASIS to develop its services for U.S. partners. As the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) continues to grow, now including well over 50,000 open access books, Sharla Lair, Senior Strategist of Open Access and Scholarly Communication at LYRASIS, and Tom Mosterd, Community Manager DOAB-OAPEN recently discussed what libraries, publishers and other U.S. partners may expect from both open infrastructure services for open access books in the near future.

 

Building stronger infrastructures to support open access books: LYRASIS, DOAB and OAPEN

In 2021, DOAB and OAPEN entered into a new partnership with LYRASIS to develop its services for U.S. partners. As the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) continues to grow, now including well over 50,000 open access books, Sharla Lair, Senior Strategist of Open Access and Scholarly Communication at LYRASIS, and Tom Mosterd, Community Manager DOAB-OAPEN recently discussed what libraries, publishers and other U.S. partners may expect from both open infrastructure services for open access books in the near future.

Rapid Science

“Open, collaborative research accelerates scientific discovery, yet there are serious roadblocks to sharing data and insights. First, team science requires time and attention. Second, the current incentive system of ‘publish or perish’ positions collaborators as competitors. Our solutions include tools, facilitated sharing, and rewards….”