Third-Party Material in Open Access Monographs: How Far-Reaching is the Creative Commons Licence Really?

by Ralf Flohr, Stefanie Richter and Olaf Siegert

Background to Open Access monographs

Open Access monographs are playing an increasingly important role in the Open Access transformation of the publication system: Specialist publishers have reacted to this development and come up with new business models for the publication of books in Open Access (OA). Organisations that promote research and research institutions themselves have established publication funds and provide the financial resources for Open Access publications. Libraries are archiving Open Access publications on their in-house publication servers, making them accessible to the public and ensuring both their visibility and long-term availability.

Use of the Creative Commons licence

The question of who is allowed to use an Open Access publication and how is usually regulated with a Creative Commons licence (CC licence) linked to every document. This opens up, for example, depending on how it is structured and under certain conditions, the right to copy, store, archive, redistribute the publication and make it publicly accessible, without having to ask the respective rights holder for consent. Libraries also use the CC licences in this way to incorporate Open Access publications into their stocks and disseminate them. Creative Commons licences thus make barrier-free access to scientific publications possible in the first place.

Problems with OA monographs containing third-party material

However, there are problems with the implementation here, particularly regarding the Open Access monographs. Things becomes particularly difficult if third-party material which is subject to another licence is used. The third-party material can mean illustrations, photographs, charts, tables and other diagrams, for example.

If the authors are unable to invoke citation law, they need to get the approval of the rights holder before incorporating this material in their monograph. In many cases, the third-party material is not subject to the Creative Commons licence applicable to the monograph. Authors are much more likely to use third-party material on the basis of another licence that does not confer the same usage possibilities as the CC licence. The principle of ‘all rights reserved’ usually applies to this material. Detailed guidance on handling thirdparty materials can also be found in the OA Books Toolkit from Open Access Publishing in European Networks (OAPEN).
In the Quality standards for getting started with Open Access provision of books (PDF) published by the National Contact Point Open Access OA2020-DE, the following is stated on the inclusion of third-party materials under the point rights and licences:

“The rights for illustrations and other external material in the books are clarified, clearly stated and do not hinder the provision of the entire work under a Creative Commons licence.”

Unfortunately, this is often not the case in practice, because some academic publishers furnish the Creative Commons licences of Open Access monographs with restrictions for third-party material. Here are two examples:

Example 1

Schettler, Leon Valentin: Socializing Development, transcript Verlag, Bielefeld, 2020.

Example 2

Teske, Sven (ed.): Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals, Springer Nature, Cham, 2020.

Publishers cover their backs with blanket policy

The Open Access use of the entire work is actually impeded in practice when external material is included, if this material is not subject to the Creative Commons licence as well. In their imprints, the publishers often point out – as standard practice – that further usage rights must be obtained from the respective rights holder for the reuse of this material, even if no such third-party material appears in the monograph in question. This restriction also applies to laws of use which would be covered by the Creative Commons licence per se, for example the permission to disseminate. With the blanket restrictions in the imprint information, the publishers protect themselves in the event that conflicts arise with the rights holders in the further use of the publications. This thereby severely restricts the opportunities that actually arise from the CC licence and creates major challenges for those who would like to reuse the works according to the principles of Creative Commons.

Difficult Open Access use in practice

This practice of blanket restrictions is problematic for the dissemination of Open Access publications, particularly for monographs. Obtaining permission for further use, by people who operate repositories for example, is often difficult, representing a hurdle for free dissemination. This means that the monographs cannot be used comprehensively according to the principles of Open Access. Possible usage scenarios, such as publication in scientific and social networks such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu, and use as Open Educational Resources (OER) are also made more difficult.

Then again, from a scientific perspective, it would not make sense to disseminate the monographs without the third-party material they contain. Strictly speaking, such monographs can therefore no longer be described as Open Access publications according to the principles of the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. Rather, it is a form of free Open Access that essentially provides read-only access. A further problem occurs if these documents with machine-readable data are declared to be Creative Commons publications and documented in the relevant search engines, but then cannot be comprehensively used as such.

Recommended actions for stakeholders

On the basis of the aspects mentioned above, we believe that this practice of restricted CC licences has a detrimental effect on the development of Open Access. The question is how to prevent this practice in the future, or how to ensure that Open Access publications are provided with unrestricted CC licences. To this end, we have put together some recommendations for the various stakeholders.

What authors and publishers can do:

  • Clarify the rights of third-party material in advance so that comprehensive use according to the principles of Open Access is possible. Third-party material should be incorporated into the work according to the principles of the citation law.
  • If this is not possible, licence-free third-party material should be used, or third-party material for which a compatible Creative Commons licence can be agreed with the rights holders.
  • Publishers should refrain from making blanket restrictions if no third-party material is even used in the work.

What Open Access commissioners, libraries and promotion funds can do:

  • A decisive factor is explaining the legal consequences of using third-party material in Open Access monographs to authors and advising them.
  • Organisations that promote Open Access monographs should ideally only fund those works which contain no restrictions of the Creative Commons licence.

This might also interest you:

  • Legal Compendium on Open Science: Guideline answers Legal Questions
  • Promoting OER: How to create an open textbook
  • Open Access for Monographs: Small Steps along a difficult Path
  • This text has been translated from German.

    The post Third-Party Material in Open Access Monographs: How Far-Reaching is the Creative Commons Licence Really? first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

    A Fork in the Road: Peter Suber on the importance of supporting Open Science Infrastructure

    On a gloomy Friday afternoon back in March, SPARC Europe had the pleasure of interviewing a very special guest. We sat down (in our respective living rooms, in front of our […]

    The post A Fork in the Road: Peter Suber on the importance of supporting Open Science Infrastructure appeared first on SPARC Europe.

    Open Science and Knowledge Justice: How It Started – How It’s Going?

    A GenR theme: Open Science and Knowledge Justice – announcement and call for contributions (April ‘21). GenR is running a theme on the topic of Open Science and Knowledge Justice: inequality, equality, equity, and justice for engaging with knowledge. The presentation of Open Science as being about the technical opening of the research cycle – data, literature, open standards, PIDs, etc.

    Source

    Registered Reports: One Year at PLOS ONE


    A little over a year ago, PLOS ONE launched two new submission formats: Registered Report Protocols, peer-reviewed articles that describe planned research not yet initiated, and their follow-up Registered Reports, which report the results of the completed research and which receive an in-principle acceptance when their protocol is accepted for publication. It was part of a broader push for preregistration at PLOS.

    When we added these options to the list of regular submission types we consider, the format wasn’t new: about 200 journals had already considered registered reports for publication, and the number has kept increasing since. The format had initially been relatively welcomed in the behavioral sciences and then made its way, sometimes with a few tweaks, to other disciplines. Preregistration in general has even been the norm in clinical trial research for years, albeit not necessarily with peer-review. And Registered Reports weren’t even entirely new at PLOS ONE: our partnerships with the Children’s Tumor Foundation and FluLab predate this launch.

    But this launch had two distinctive features: we would publish the protocol (also called “stage-1 registered report”) of all the registered reports we would consider. We would do so regardless of the eventual results of the planned research, of course, but also regardless of whether the final report (also called “stage-2 registered report”) would be submitted or even completed. The Registered Report Protocol would be its own publication, and it would be so with the standard of any PLOS publication: with our expectations of data availability and rigorous ethics oversight, and with the possibility to make the full peer-review history available. It was, as far as we were aware, a distinctively transparent publishing format offering.

    Other journals already published stage-1 Registered Reports, to be sure, but not at that scale and with the disciplinary breadth that PLOS ONE provides. This was this launch’s second distinctive feature: we were relying on an academic board of thousands of members to embrace this format with a different review process and criteria on as many study types and topics as the journal would normally consider.

    For the 1st time since @RegReports were created in 2013, there is now at least one journal option for every research field across the full spectrum of physical, life and social sciences.

    Chris Chambers, on PLOS ONE launching Registered Reports

    The Registered Report format has been adapted and implemented in many ways across hundreds of journals (for instance at PLOS Biology). We made some choices with our own format: although deviations from the published protocol could invalidate the in-principle acceptance of the final report, we would consider such deviations, provided they are acknowledged and justified. We would also welcome exploratory, unregistered, or unplanned analyses in the final report, provided they are clearly identified as such. A Registered Report Protocol is an opportunity to receive early feedback on a study; it is the opportunity to claim ownership of a research project without having to wait for results to come in; it is also a tool against publication bias that drives us all not to publish null results. Above all, we envisioned Registered Report Protocols as a a mechanism for transparency in publishing and reporting rather than an unbreakable and inflexible vow. 

    Our choice to distinguish clearly between the protocol and its final report, on the other hand, makes our format less adaptable to serial submissions and iterative registrations (which other journals publishing Registered Reports explicitly welcome). But authors wishing to do so with PLOS ONE can submit subsequent iterations of their registration (i.e., after the first follow-up to a published Registered Report Protocol) as regular research articles. But with that caveat, we wanted a format that is relatively flexible and that could be suited to as many study types and fields as we normally consider.

    So what can we say a year later? We have received over 300 Registered Report Protocol submissions, about 60 of which are already published or accepted for publication (the first Registered Report Protocol was published in June of last year), by first authors from more than 20 countries. These submissions have acceptance and rejection rates comparable to our regular submissions. They cover many disciplinary areas: about 70% of the submissions are in medicine and health sciences, 15% in the behavioral and social sciences, and 8% in the life sciences. A call for papers in cognitive psychology, launched last fall in collaboration with the Center for Open Science, invited Registered Report Protocol submissions. Finally, we have already received a few follow-up Registered Report submissions. If and when we publish these stage-2 Registered Reports, they will be interlinked with their corresponding protocols so readers can easily navigate between them. 

    The Registered Report Protocol submissions we received this past year are now published protocols for a systematic review on the effectiveness of public health interventions against COVID-19, a psychology survey study on trust in international relations, an animal study on neural plasticity, a study of biomedical sentence similarity measures, among others. They have been handled by a number of our Academic Editors and reviewers, many of whom were just discovering that Registered Reports were an option in their field. The journal’s editorial board members and reviewers have been instrumental in this successful rollout. As Andrew Miles, author of a published Registered Report Protocol, attested, “my research team and I benefited from careful reading by several excellent reviewers, as from an editor who pointed us to a data collection tool that we hadn’t previously been aware of.” 

    Reproducibility of medical research findings has been found to be low, and Registered Reports give me the unique opportunity to describe in detail the statistical-methodological approach prior to having seen the data, and to get credit for it with respect to visibility in authorship. When we submitted our registered report to PLOS ONE we received very detailed reviewer comments, and we could improve our study design and analysis, as well as reporting. PLOS ONE publishes the [Registered Report Protocol] prior to the final study results, which has the advantage that the study can be brought to other people’s attention at a much earlier stage.

    Ulrike Held, PLOS ONE Author
    Is reporting quality in medical publications associated with biostatisticians as co-authors? A registered report protocol

    Registered Reports are now just one of an increasing menu of publication formats. Recently, PLOS ONE launched new protocol types: Study Protocols and Lab Protocols. The Study Protocol format closely resembles that of Registered Report Protocols, but doesn’t come with an in-principle acceptance of the final report. Under the leadership of our new Editor-in-Chief Emily Chenette, PLOS ONE will continue to work with our communities to improve scientific communication, using the principles of openness, transparency, rigor, and reproducibility as guides.

    The post Registered Reports: One Year at PLOS ONE appeared first on EveryONE.

    Let’s Align International and National Copyright OA Policy Action

    “For so many years researchers have been confused about what they can and can’t do with respect to copyright …We can make the life of the author easier!”: these were some […]

    The post Let’s Align International and National Copyright OA Policy Action appeared first on SPARC Europe.

    Global Crisis and Pathways for Open Science

    A report on the panel ‘Open Science in a Time of Global Crises’ from the Open Science Conference 2021. The panel covered perspectives from Open Science practitioners on the implications of doing better science and reducing the science and technology divides internationally. The panel brought together a number of Open Science practitioners to look at how the current COVID-19 pandemic crisis is…

    Source

    Open Science Barcamp 2021: A GenR Report

    This was the first fully online event for the main Open Science Barcamp and as one of the participants said ‘great success – almost as good as “the real thing” ;)’. Ninety-two participants quickly spun-up twelve sessions and a lot of productive spin-offs as well as some good lessons learned for evolving online Barcamp organisation. Barcamps are open community events, where participants pitch short…

    Source

    Coding da Vinci Niedersachsen 2020 endet mit Preisverleihung an herausragende Projekte

    Zur Abschlussveranstaltung von Coding da Vinci Niedersachsen 2020 am 29. Januar 2021 präsentierten insgesamt 10 Projekte ihre großartigen Ergebnisse aus den vergangenen 14 Hackathon-Wochen vor etwa 250 Zuschauer*innen. Rund 40 Kulturinstitutionen aus Niedersachsen hatten ihre Datensets beim Kick-Off am 24. und 25. Oktober 2020 zur Verfügung gestellt und die Teilnehmenden dazu inspiriert, ihre kreativen Ideen dazu in neue Projekte zu übersetzen.

    Die Preisverleihung fand Online statt und wurde vollständig live bei Youtube gestreamt. Der Stream ist hier abrufbar: https://youtu.be/1NrFbMcUBZs

    Die Gewinnerinnen und Gewinner

    Welches Potenzial in offenen Kulturdaten liegt, haben die Projektteams mit ihren beeindruckenden Ergebnissen wieder einmal eindrucksvoll bewiesen. Die fünfköpfige Jury, bestehend aus Expert*innen aus unterschiedlichen Bereichen der Open, – Kultur- und Tech-Szene, stellte die Wahl der Gewinnerteams vor eine erhebliche Herausforderung.

    Vergeben wurden die Preise in den unterschiedlichen Kategorien an die Projekte

    • Appsolutly Old (ab ‘03:30:31 im Stream) in der Kategorie “Funniest Hack”, übergeben von Wolf-Tilo Balke
    • Maschinenlerner (ab ‘03:36:04 im Stream) in der Kategorie “Most Useful”, übergeben von Ina Blümel
    • FabSeal (ab ‘03:41:14 im Stream) in der Kategorie “Best Design”, übergeben von Mareike König

    Über den 4. Gewinner entschied das Publikum via Online-Voting, an dem sich mehr als 220 Personen beteiligten:

    • Herzog VR August (ab ‘03:46:27 im Stream) in der Kategorie “Everybody’s Darling”, übergeben von Tabea Golgath
    Bild Appsolutly Old: CC BY-SA 4.0 Kira Lorberg, Lukas Sontheimer // Bild Herzog VR August: CC BY-SA 3.0 Herzog VR August Team // Bild Maschinenlerner: CC BY-SA 3.0 DE Pit Noack / Team Maschinenlerner // Bild FabSeal: CC BY-SA 4.0 Joana Bergsiek

    Chancen, Herausforderungen und Notwendigkeiten mit offenen Kulturdaten – Keynote von Ellen Euler

    In Ihrer Keynote “Gemeinsam den digitalen Kulturraum der Zukunft gestalten” (ab ‘02:59:57 im Stream) sprach Prof. Dr. jur. Ellen Euler LL.M. (FH Potsdam) über die Bedeutung offener Kulturdaten aus Sicht der Wissenschaft. In ihrem Vortrag beleuchtete sie die Chancen und Herausforderungen, die in der Verfügbarkeit offener Kulturdaten liegen. Außerdem richtete sie den Fokus auf die Notwendigkeiten – auch aus juristischer Perspektive – die erforderlich sind, damit eine möglichst weite Verbreitung und große Nutzung der Daten erreicht werden kann.

    Die Vortragfolien zur Keynote können hier abgerufen werden.

    Dank, Abschied und ein Wiedersehen in Schleswig-Holstein

    Wir bedanken uns bei allen Teilnehmenden für ihren großartigen Einsatz, für ihre Ideen, die Umsetzungen und die gelungene Präsentation!

    Unser Dank geht an alle Akteur*innen von Coding da Vinci Niedersachsen 2020:

    Der Jury aus den Mitgliedern

    • Dr. Tabea Golgath, (Stiftung Niedersachsen)
    • Antje Theise, (Universitätsbibliothek Rostock)
    • Wolf-Tilo Balke, (TU Braunschweig)
    • Dr. Mareike König (Deutsches Historisches Instituts, Paris)
    • Prof. Dr. Ina Blümel, (Hochschule Hannover und Open Science Lab der TIB Hannover)

    und ein großes Dankeschön insbesondere an

    • die Kulturinstitutionen in Niedersachsen, die ihre Datensets für den Hackathon aufbereitet und zur Verfügung gestellt haben und
    • alle Projektteams, die über einen Zeitraum von 14 Wochen unermüdlich und mit viel Leidenschaft diese sehr spannenden Projekte entwickelt haben!

    Nach dem Hackathon ist vor dem Hackathon – Weiter geht es im April, zum Start von Coding da Vinci Schleswig-Holstein 2021!

    Der Beitrag Coding da Vinci Niedersachsen 2020 endet mit Preisverleihung an herausragende Projekte erschien zuerst auf TIB-Blog.

    The post Coding da Vinci Niedersachsen 2020 endet mit Preisverleihung an herausragende Projekte first appeared on Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science.

    Opening the Window of Discourse for Citizen Science

    COVID has democratised data science and increasingly the public expect open data, research, and interpretation in more aspects of their lives. Who will be the ones to provide this knowledge for citizens? A proposed community publication The Citizen Science Guide for Research Libraries by the LIBER Citizen Science Working Group looks to explore these questions – putting forward that research…

    Source

    Open Science Podcasts: 7 + 3 Tips for Your Ears

    by Claudia Sittner

    Podcasts are booming – not just these days, but in the time of the pandemic the format has gained a new appeal for many. And since this blog is all about Open Science and infrastructure service providers, we set out to explore the best podcasts on the topic.

    So here are our podcast tips for anyone who is interested in Open Science or would like to take a closer look at the topic. At this point, a big thank you to our followers on Twitter, whose tips we have included in the following collection.

    In it, we present 7 open science podcasts that are still being produced and 3 that have unfortunately already been discontinued, but are still interesting for open science beginners. Have fun listening!

    1. Open Science Radio
      This podcast deals with the topic of Open Science in its many-sided and -layered aspects – from Open Access to Citizen Science and Open Data to public science and Open Education. The podcast aims to create a basic understanding, but above all to inform about current developments.

      Hosts: Matthias Fromm, Konrad Förstner
      Since: 2013
      Language: German, some in English

    2. ORION Open Science Podcast
      From Data Sharing to Citizen Science and from Peer Review to professional development the episodes of ORION Open Science Podcast will explore the good, the bad, and the ugly of the current scientific system, and what Open Science practices can do to improve the way we do science.

      Given the momentum of the Open Science movement it makes sense that researchers of all levels want to understand the issues and the opportunities behind it. The principles of Open Science are about accessibility and collaboration in research, but this still leaves questions to be answered. Why has Open Science become part of the research landscape? How will it impact day-to-day scientific work? What new developments are available and how can they be used effectively?

      The podcasts’s motto: The best way to learn about something new is to simply talk to people who have knowledge and informed opinions on the topic.

      Hosts: Luiza Bengtsson, Emma Harris, Zoe Ingram
      Organisation: Max-Delbrück-Center for Molecular Medicine, Helmholtz Association (MDC)
      Since: 2019
      Language: English

    3. The Future is Open Science
      In this podcast people from the scientific community talk about how they promote Open Science in their daily work. The topic is examined from very different perspectives: Whether it’s with the big science policy glasses, when it comes to classifying different initiatives and developments, or with the subject-specific glasses, when the economic cultural change towards more research transparency is illuminated, or with the operational view of practitioners, how Open Science can be implemented concretely. The podcast delves into the depths of science communication in the digital age and gives tips and tricks on Open Science in practice.

      Host: Doreen Siegfried
      Organisation: ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
      Language: German
      Since: 2020

    4. The Road to Open Science
      The Road to Open Science Podcast functions as a guide on everything Open at Utrecht University and beyond. In the monthly podcast the hosts discuss the latest developments in the fields of Open Acces, Open Data/Software, public engagement and recognition and rewards. The hosts follow the path to adapting Open Science practices through the perspective of researchers from different disciplines. In each episode they talk to people within the academic community about their research, initiatives, or experiences in relation to open science.

      Hosts: Sanli Faez, Lieven Heeremans
      Organisation: Utrecht University, The Netherlands
      Language: English
      Since: 2017

    5. Open Science Talk
      This podcast is pretty much «open anything» from Open Science, Open Access, Open Education, Open Data, Open Software …. The hosts invite guests to explain different topics or share with them some of their research practices and reflections related to Open Science.

      They try to cover a wide range of different topics within the Open Science spectrum, such as Open Access, Open Data, Open Research, Open Education, Citizen Science, Open Health… the list is long. They seek to cover the various branches of Open Science from different angles, and they also try to talk about recent events in the Open Science world.

      Their guests: librarians, professors, students, and PhD-candidates from all kinds of different fields, also publishers and administrative employees that work within science.

      Hosts: Per Pippin Aspaas, before: Erik Lieungh
      Organisation: University Library at UiT The Arctic University of Norway
      Language: English
      Since: 2018

    6. ReproducibiliTea
      Serving mugs of ReproducibiliTea: The blends of this podcast include transparency, openness and robustness with a spoonful of science. The hosts reflect on their experiences trying to push for open and reproducible research. Their conversations with other early career researchers highlight challenges and opportunities to achieve changes in the scientific system.

      Hosts: Sophia Crüwell, Amy Orben, Sam Parsons
      Organisation: ReproducibiliTea Journal Club, 121 Clubs worldwide
      Language: English
      Since: 2019

    7. Open Science Stories
      This podcast is the newcomer among our collection. Open Science concepts are compactly packaged as stories and explained in 10 minutes or less.

      Host: Heidi Seibold
      Language: English
      Since: 2021

    Open-Science-Podcasts: production discontinued

    In addition to the podcasts that are currently in production, we would also like to recommend some whose production has unfortunately already been discontinued. Nevertheless, the existing episodes are still available and worth listening to, especially for Open Science beginners:

    1. Open Science in Action
      This interview podcast is about Open Science activities – mostly from Austria. People and institutions are visited who are involved in Open Science and/or who are doing it themselves. In 30-60 minutes, innovative and exciting activities around the opening of science are shown and the listeners are introduced to the different aspects of it. From Open Access in university libraries to Open Source at research institutes to open hackspaces and Citizen Science.

      Hosts: Stefan Kasberger, Marc Pietkiewicz
      Organisation: ÖH Universität Graz, Austria (Students´ Union of the University of Graz, Austria)
      Language: German
      Since: 2014, 10 episodes

    2. Open Science
      In this series of podcasts the impact of opening up science is considered: allowing both the research community and the public a freely access to the results of scientific work. Individuals can be fully informed about medical or environmental research, students worldwide can get access to the latest work, and software agents can roam the vast scientific knowledge base seeking patterns and correlations that no human has observed. Ultimately, it may profoundly change the way science is done.

      Organisation: University of Oxford
      Language: English
      Since: 2012-2013, 23 episodes

    3. Colper Science
      This interview podcast is also about Open Science and its methods. The podcast makers believe that it is possible for researchers to fully migrate into the universe of Open Science by using tools and methods that are already available. Unfortunately, however, most of these tools, methods and opportunities remain unknown to most of the research community. The aim of Colper Science is to make these tools known by sharing success stories around Open Science.

      Hosts: Kambiz Chizari, Ilyass Tabiai
      Language: English
      Since: 2017-2018, 26 episodes

    Your Open Science podcast is not included?

    These were our discoveries of Open Science podcasts. I’m sure there are more podcasts worth listening to in this field, especially internationally.

    If you can think of any, we would be happy to receive link tips on Twitter and Facebook or by email to team (at) zbw-mediatalk.eu! We will be glad to add your podcast to our collection!

    Read more

    References Portrait: Photo Claudia Sittner©

    This text has been translated from German.

    The post Open Science Podcasts: 7 + 3 Tips for Your Ears first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.The post Open Science Podcasts: 7 + 3 Tips for Your Ears first appeared on Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science.

    Science Barometer 2020: Starting Points for Open Science?

    by Claudia Sittner

    The Science Barometer – not to be confused with the Barometer for the Academic World – is a representative opinion poll that has been examining the attitude of German citizens to science and research annually since 2014. There were additional surveys in April and May 2020 owing to the corona crisis (“Corona Special”). Last month, the results of the most recent survey from November 2020 were presented.

    Brochure Science Barometer 2020 (PDF). The use of the graphics of the results is possible if the source “Wissenschaft im Dialog/Kantar Emnid” is mentioned. The graphics run under the licence [CC BY-ND 4.0], adaptations of the format for editorial publications are permitted.

    The Science Barometer was commissioned by the organisation Wissenschaft im Dialog – An initiative of Germany´s scientific community (Science in Dialog, WiD). This non-profit organisation is aimed at promoting dialogue about science and research in Germany and encouraging as many people as possible to take part. WiD also drives forward the further development of science communication and thereby also of Open Science. The survey is sponsored by the Robert Bosch Stiftung and the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft.

    Around 1,000 citizens from the age of 14 upwards in private households were surveyed during telephone interviews. German-speaking residents formed the parent population. We have taken a look at the results of the Science Barometer 2020 from the perspective of its importance for Open Science in science and research, and present its interesting findings.

    Interest stable; traditional media most important source of information

    Interest in science and research is stable at 60% of the population and is only exceeded by a 68% interest in local news. That corresponds with the opinion of 59% of those surveyed, who agree with the statement either partly or completely that they personally profit from science and research.

    Science Barometer 2020. The use of the graphics of the results is possible if the source “Wissenschaft im Dialog/Kantar Emnid” is mentioned. The graphics run under the licence [CC BY-ND 4.0], adaptations of the format for editorial publications are permitted.

    They get their information primarily (80% – occasionally to very frequently) via the traditional media. Less frequently via internet sites of scientific institutions (43%), and in only 29% of cases, those surveyed got their information via research topics on social media. In the light of the corona pandemic, online services of traditional news media became more relevant.

    For science and research, this means that it is worth investing more in press and PR work so that relevant scientific findings are taken up by traditional media and can reach the population. Particularly for institutions that are committed to Open Science, this seems to be a good place to start, to ensure that their content and dedication are perceived more strongly. Fittingly, a third of those surveyed are of the opinion that scientists should inform people more strongly about their work.

    Trust higher than in previous years; tendency sinking in the COVID-19 year 2020

    Trust in science and research is also very high in November 2020 at almost two thirds (60% either tend to trust, or trust completely). In previous years, this value was around 50%. It is interesting here that trust in science and research initially rose sharply – to 77% – at the beginning of the corona pandemic (survey April 2020): in comparison to 2019, four times as many people surveyed trusted it “fully and completely”. However, this value had almost halved again by the time of the November 2020 survey.

    Science Barometer 2020. The use of the graphics of the results is possible if the source “Wissenschaft im Dialog/Kantar Emnid” is mentioned. The graphics run under the licence [CC BY-ND 4.0], adaptations of the format for editorial publications are permitted.




    This shows a high degree of confidence in science and research at the beginning of the pandemic and could point to a disappointment experienced by many people during the second corona lockdown.

    Science Barometer 2020. The use of the graphics of the results is possible if the source “Wissenschaft im Dialog/Kantar Emnid” is mentioned. The graphics run under the licence [CC BY-ND 4.0], adaptations of the format for editorial publications are permitted.

    Reasons for the credibility were quoted as expertise, integrity as well as acting in the interests of the general public. Compared to the previous year, the tendency is increasing for all reasons. By contrast, the reasons for mistrust are:

    • Dependency on funders (49% tend to agree, or agree fully and completely),
    • Scientists adjust the findings to their expectations (25% – see above),
    • Often make mistakes (16% – see above).

    In comparison to the previous year, however, the agreement with these reasons is to some extent severely reduced. The lowest value since the beginning of the survey series regarding the question of whether people should trust their feelings and their faith instead of science, corresponds to this (23% – tend to agree and agree fully and completely).

    For supporters of Open Science, the fact that trust and educational level correlate can play an additional role here: The higher the formal educational level, the greater the trust. If one assumes that in most cases science communication reaches people with a higher level of education in particular, this could be evaluated as a positive sign. For among these people, trust in science and research is high. On the other hand, it also means that science communication needs to make more of an effort to reach people without a higher formal education in order to gain the trust of this group as well.

    Corona Special: Science fundamentally important; controversy welcome

    When it comes to the coronavirus, the public trust the statements of doctors and medical personnel the most (80% – tend to trust and fully and completely trust), closely followed by trust in the statements of scientists (73% – tend to trust or fully and completely trust). However, some also suspect (39% – tend to agree and fully and completely agree), that scientists are not telling us everything they know about the coronavirus. The same number of respondents also believes that it is important to get information about the virus from outside science.

    “The fact that so many people trust in science shows how good the dialogue between science and society is functioning during the pandemic. However, the relatively high number of people who are undecided or sceptical is cause for concern: Science needs to open up even more and also seek to start a dialogue with those who are sceptical. To ensure that this occurs, we need to support all researchers in communicating their knowledge, their results and their working methods”.

    — WiD CEO Markus Weißkopf.

    Overall, the public wants political decisions in the context of the corona pandemic to be based on scientific findings. Direct interference by scientists in politics, on the other hand, is not desired. On the whole, this is good news for Open Science enthusiasts, as it means that they are awarded credibility in issues regarding corona, and it is therefore worth conducting one’s research as openly as possible and communicating one’s own work. It also shows that Open Science can score points with the public, precisely because of its transparency: Results can be openly understood, and there are no obligatory intermediaries such as journalists, who filter and evaluate the information.

    Science Barometer 2020. The use of the graphics of the results is possible if the source “Wissenschaft im Dialog/Kantar Emnid” is mentioned. The graphics run under the licence [CC BY-ND 4.0], adaptations of the format for editorial publications are permitted.

    By contrast, increasingly less credibility is ascribed to the statements of politicians and journalists. One can conclude that researchers would be well advised to communicate coronavirus´ issues to the public themselves or to aim for a very close collaboration with the traditional media. The format of (scientific) podcasts (German) has proven to be a good option for this during the corona crisis – the number of listeners and their popularity have strongly increased over the previous year.

    There is a very high level of trust that researchers are clearly communicating whether their statements are verified findings or open issues on the topic of the COVID-19 pandemic (46% – tend to agree and fully and completely agree; 40% undecided). Controversies among scientists are evaluated as being positive and informative by more than two thirds of those asked. For the Open Science community, this is a confirmation that it should campaign for discourse to be opened up and create spaces, so that this can take place transparently, publicly and comprehensibly.

    This is even more important, because there are also people who “in the corona pandemic prefer to rely on ‘common sense’ than on scientific studies. It is even more important to communicate facts and recommendations for action via diverse formats, in order to reach those who are uncertain and have doubts”, confirms Tina Stengele, provisional head of the science division at the Robert Bosch Stiftung, which is supporting the Science Barometer.

    Science Barometer and Open Science: Strengthen science communication

    Applying and verifying scientific findings quickly has become more important than ever, owing to the corona crisis. This has led to science taking on a more prominent role amongst the public, whose trust in researchers and their integrity was also strong according to the last survey of the Science Barometer.“

    “A decisive pillar in strengthening and extending trust is the accessibility and comprehensibility of research results.. (…) This strengthens us in our conviction that it is a successful model to explain findings and developments straightforwardly, to classify them and to present their benefits – for experts and laypersons alike”.

    — Janis Eitner, director of communication at the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft

    From an Open Science perspective, now is certainly still a good time for urging the scientific system to become even more open in all its subprocesses, and for using professional science communication more widely, on own channels such as podcasts or on a stable cooperation with the traditional media. The negotiating position for more Open Science is favourable right now, and the experiences from the pandemic have made it unmistakably clear to everyone how important having a more open ecosystem of free knowledge is and will be in times of global crises.

    This might also interest you:

    References
    Portrait: Photo Claudia Sittner©
    The use of the graphics of the results is possible if the source “Wissenschaft im Dialog/Kantar Emnid” is mentioned. The graphics run under the licence [CC BY-ND 4.0], adaptations of the format for editorial publications are permitted.

    This text has been translated from German.

    The post Science Barometer 2020: Starting Points for Open Science? first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.The post Science Barometer 2020: Starting Points for Open Science? first appeared on Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science.

    20 Jahre Wikipedia  

    ein Beitrag von Matti Stöhr und Michael Hohlfeld

    Vor 20 Jahren hat Jimmy Wales zusammen mit Larry Sanger die Wikipedia aus der Taufe gehoben. Die freie Online-Enzyklopädie und größte digitale Wissenssammlung der Welt hat diesen runden Geburtstag am und rund um den 15. Januar 2021 ausgiebig gefeiert und sich (zu recht) feiern lassen.

    Medial wurde der 20. Geburtstag auch hierzulande sehr breit aufgegriffen. Insbesondere Funk und Fernsehen haben sich in vielen Beiträgen mit den Hintergründen der Entstehung der Wikipedia und dem Thema freies Wissen auseinandergesetzt und aufgezeigt, wie die – sehr erfolgreiche, aber tatsächlich nicht unumstrittene – Plattform funktioniert. Empfehlen wollen wir an dieser Stelle die WDR-Dokumentation „Das Wikipedia Versprechen“ in der ARD-Mediathek, welche in einer etwas längeren Fassung auch ARTE im Programm hat. Nicht zuletzt kritische Stimmen kommen hier nicht zu kurz. Weitere Beiträge sind zum Beispiel auf der offiziellen Geburtstagsseite der Wikimedia Deutschland verlinkt. Auf dieser Seite finden sich aber nicht nur Medienberichte, sondern z.B. auch eine visualisierte Zeitreise, persönliche Geschichten und viele Informationen, wie man bei der Wikipedia mitmachen kann.

    Auch in den den sozialen Netzwerken wurde und wird das Jubiläum unter dem Hashtag #Wikipedia20 ausgiebig thematisiert. Auf Twitter und Instagram haben wir uns am letzten Freitag sehr gerne den Gratulanten angeschlossen, da uns als Bibliothek und Forschungseinrichtung doch viel mit der Wikipedia verbindet. Lambert Heller, Leiter unseres Open Science Labs, hat dazu in einem kurzen Gratulationsvideo die Wikipedia aus TIB-Sicht gewürdigt. Er benennt beispielhaft Aktivitäten und Projekte aus der TIB in Nutzung und in Zusammenarbeit mit der Wikipedia, der Wikimedia Deutschland und diverser Schwesterprojekte. Unter anderem kommt die Mentor*innen-Beteiligung am Fellow-Programm Freies Wissen mit Ina Blümel zur Sprache.


    Eine sehr aktuelle Verbindung ist etwa der Kultur-Hackaton Coding da Vinci Niedersachsen 2020, welcher ganz bald am 29. Januar 2021 mit einer Online-Preisverleihung endet. Ab 16 Uhr werden dann die einzelnen Projekte der Öffentlichkeit vorgestellt und in verschiedenen Kategorien ausgezeichnet. (hier kostenlos zur Preisverleihung anmelden)

    Auch viele andere Bibliotheken nutzen mit verschiedenen Aktivitäten die Wikipedia professionell und/oder sind eng mit ihr verzahnten Plattformen wie Wikimedia Commons oder Wikidata verbunden. Das von der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek (DNB) und Wikimedia Deutschland initiierte WikiLibrary-Manifest unterstreicht diese Verbundenheit und das gemeinsame Ziel eines internationalen Wissensnetzwerks. Natürlich haben auch wir als TIB das Manifest mitgezeichnet.

    Außerdem: Anlässlich des Wikipedia-Geburtstags haben wir im TIB AV-Portal eine kleine Liste von thematisch passenden Videos zusammengestellt. Seien Sie herzlich eingeladen in unsere Wikiversum-Watchlist reinzuschauen.

    Screenshot der öffentlichen Watchlist „Wikiversum“ im TIB AV-Portal

    #1Lib1Ref

    Passend zum Geburtstag wurde am 15. Januar auch wieder die Editier-Kampagne #1Lib1Ref gestartet. Eine konkrete, aktive Form des Mitfeierns und des Mitgestaltens. #1Lib1Ref hat das Ziel, durch das Hinzufügen von mindestens einem Zitat bzw. Beleg aus zuverlässigen Quellen in Wikipedia-Artikeln, die Enzyklopädie stetig noch besser zu machen und baut auf die bibliothekarische Expertise. Die aktuelle Kampagne läuft noch bis zum 5. Februar (sowie vom 15. Mai bis 5. Juni) und der Aufwand für jede*n Einzelne*n hält sich in Grenzen. Weitere Details und Hilfe gibt es – natürlich – im Wikipedia-Artikel zu #1Lib1Ref. Übrigens: selbstverständlich können auch (wissenschaftliche) Videos als Quelle/Beleg in Wikipedia-Artikel eingefügt werden. Für die Einbindung von Videos aus dem TIB AV-Portal gibt es sogar praktische Vorlagen:

    1. zur Einbindung von expliziten Video-Zitaten – Vorlage 1: TIBAV sowie
    2. zur Einbindung von Video-Suchen unter Berücksichtigung bestimmter Parameter – Vorlage 2: TIBAV-Suche.

    Zum Abschluss nochmals: herzlichen Glückwunsch zum Geburtstag an Wikipedia!

    Wir freuen uns auf die weitere Zusammenarbeit und feiern freies Wissen und Offenheit generell – ganz im Sinne der strategischen Ziele und Aktivitäten der TIB, unter anderem gewürdigt durch den erhaltenen Open Library Badge 2020 .

    Der Beitrag 20 Jahre Wikipedia   erschien zuerst auf TIB-Blog.

    The post 20 Jahre Wikipedia   first appeared on Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science.

    Open Science & Libraries 2021: 20 Tips for Conferences, Barcamps & Co.

    by Claudia Sittner

    After the Corona Year 2020 threw the event industry off track worldwide, event organisers have adapted to the “new normal” in 2021 and developed new digital formats. The advantage: the event world has become smaller. Events that used to take place out of reach in Sydney or Bangkok can now often be attended conveniently from the home office.

    Many organisers have also used the year to rethink their event prices, reduce fees or eliminate them altogether – which is entirely in the spirit of the Open Science idea. That is why it was not difficult for us to put together a list of conferences, workshops, barcamps and other events that you should not miss in 2021.

    JANUARY 2021

    Open Science Barcamp
    14.01.21, Online-Event
    “A session in the series leading up to the Netherlands National Open Science Festival on February 11th 2021.”
    Organised by: National Platform Open Science Netherlands


    Webinar Serie: German-Dutch dialogue on the future of libraries: Sustainability and libraries – agenda 2030
    18.01.21, Online-Event
    “Libraries are not only sustainable institutions per se, but they also make an intensive contribution to raising awareness of the need for a sustainable society. To this end they provide information, organize projects and support sustainable engagement. Why libraries in the Netherlands and in Germany play an important social role here, how they can contribute to this and what examples are available will be presented and discussed. How the international library associations like IFLA and EBLIDA support this global challenge will also be a topic in this online-seminar.”
    Organised by: Erasmus University Library Rotterdam


    ALA Midwinter Meeting & Exhibits
    22.01.21 – 26.01.21, Online-Event
    “Symposium on the Future of Libraries, offering sessions on future trends to inspire innovation in libraries, “News You Can Use” with updates that highlight new research, innovations, and advances in libraries.”
    Organised by: American Library Association


    PIDapalooza 2021: The Open Festival of Persistent Identifiers
    27.01.21, Online-Event
    “Festival of persistent identifiers. Sessions around the broad theme of PIDs and Open Research Infrastructure.”
    Organised by: CDL, Crossref, DataCite, NISO and ORCID


    FEBRUARY 2021

    Education for Data Science
    07.02.21 – 09.02.21, Jerusalem (Israel)
    “How Data Science should be taught in academic institutions and what kind of training and retraining can help support the need for new professionals in the data science ecosystem.”
    Organised by: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, CODATA


    Fake News: Impact on Society 4/4
    08.02.21, Online-Event
    “This event offers research into the concept of fake news and its impact in modern society:
    Strengthening information literacy in the time of COVID-19: the role and contributions of the National Library of Singapore. News analytics in LIS Education and Practice.”
    Organised by: News Media, Digital Humanities, FAIFE, and CLM


    Open Science Festival
    11.02.21, Online-Event
    “Open Science stands for the transition to a new, more open and participatory way of conducting, publishing and evaluating scholarly research. Central to this concept is the goal of increasing cooperation and transparency in all research stages. The National Open Science Festival provides researchers the opportunity to learn about the benefits of various Open Science practices. It is a place to meet peers that are already working openly or that are interested to start doing so. Key to this day is sharing knowledge and best practices.”
    Organised by: NPOS project Accelerate Open Science


    Barcamp Open Science 2021
    16.02.21, Online-Event
    “Discussing and learning more about, and sharing experiences on practices in Open Science.”
    Organised by: Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science


    Open Science Conference 2021
    17.02.21 – 19.02.21, Online-Event
    “This conference will especially focus on the effects and impact of (global) crises and associated societal challenges, such as the Corona pandemic or the climate change, to open research practices and science communication in the context of the digitisation of science. And vice versa, how open practices help to cope with crises. Overall, the conference addresses topics around Open Science such as: Effects and impact of current crises on open research practices and science communication – Learnings from crises to sustainably ensure the opening of science in the future – Innovations to support Open Science practices and their application and acceptance in scientific communities – Scientific benefit of Open Science practices and their impact in society such as coping with crises – Open Science education and science communication to different target groups in the broad public.”
    Organised by: Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science


    MARCH 2021

    3. Workshop Retrodigitalisierung: „OCR – Prozesse und Entwicklungen“
    01.03.21, Online-Event
    “Digitalisierung bietet neue Erschließungsmöglichkeiten, auch und vor allem durch gute Texterkennungsprogramme. Die Optical Character Recognition (OCR) ist ein Werkzeug, von dessen Qualität die Durchsuchbarkeit von Texten maßgeblich beeinflusst wird. Der Workshop befasst sich daher mit Prozessen und Entwicklungen in der OCR – einem wichtigen Bestandteil aller Digitalisierungsprojekte.”
    Organised by: ZB MED, TIB, ZBW and Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz


    Open Data Day 2021
    06.03.21, Online-Event
    “Open Data Day is an annual celebration of open data all over the world. Groups from around the world create local events on the day where they will use open data in their communities. It is an opportunity to show the benefits of open data and encourage the adoption of open data policies in government, business and civil society.”
    Organised by: Open Knowledge Foundation


    2. Bibliothekspolitischer Bundeskongress: Bibliotheken im digitalen Wandel: Orte der Partizipation und des gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalts
    26.03.21, Online-Event
    “Bibliotheken im digitalen Wandel: Orte der Partizipation und des gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalts“ – miteinander über bibliothekspolitische Fragen ins Gespräch zu kommen.”
    Organised by: German Library Association (dbv)


    APRIL 2021

    Webinar Serie: German-Dutch dialogue on the future of libraries: Central services for public libraries
    12.04.21, Online-Event
    “The national library (KB) in the Netherlands offers central digital services to public libraries and to patrons as well. How these services were initiated in the past and how the situation is currently will be presented and compared with the situation in Germany. Because of the political system and the cultural sovereignty of the federal states, the support of smaller public libraries in Germany is not centralized, but so called “Fachstellen” in various federal states offer services to their libraries. This system, its tasks and services are presented – decentralised or centralised support for public libraries – what are the advantages and disadvantages? And what effects will the pandemic have to these services in the future? How will the idea of the third place be connected with the need to offer mobile services for the library users during and after corona?”
    Organised by: Erasmus University Library Rotterdam


    MAY 2021

    IASSIST 2021: Data by Design – Building a Sustainable Data Culture
    May, Online-Event
    “The conference theme, “Data by Design: Building a Sustainable Data Culture”, emphasizes two core values embedded in the culture of Gothenburg and Sweden: design and sustainability. We invite you to explore these topics further, and discuss what they could mean to data communities. As a member of IASSIST, you are already part of at least one data community. Your other data communities may be across departments, within organizations, or among groups in different countries. How are these groups helping design a culture of practices around data that will persist across organizations and over time?”
    Organised by: Swedish National Data Service (SND)


    Library Publishing Virtual Forum
    10.05.21 – 14.05.21 Online-Event
    “This is an annual conference bringing together representatives from libraries engaged in (or considering) publishing initiatives to define and address major questions and challenges; to identify and document collaborative opportunities; and to strengthen and promote this community of practice.”
    Organised by: Library Publishing Coalition (LPC)


    JUNE 2021

    Deutscher Bibliothekarstag: forward to far
    15.06.21 – 18.06.21, Bremen (Germany)
    “Alternative room concepts, Inventory management, Library management, Library education, Blended Library Concepts, Community building, Digitale editions, Digitization of the teaching, Discovery and eBooks, Electronic Resource Management – and much more.”
    Organised by: The Association of German Librarians (VDB – Verein Deutscher Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare) and Berufsverband Information Bibliothek e.V. (BIB)


    IASSIST 2021/CESSDA: Data by Design – Building a Sustainable Data Culture
    30.06.21 – 02.07.21, Gothenburg (Sweden)
    “The conference theme, “Data by Design: Building a Sustainable Data Culture”, emphasizes two core values embedded in the culture of Gothenburg and Sweden: design and sustainability. We invite you to explore these topics further, and discuss what they could mean to data communities. As a member of IASSIST, you are already part of at least one data community. Your other data communities may be across departments, within organizations, or among groups in different countries. How are these groups helping design a culture of practices around data that will persist across organizations and over time?”
    Organised by: Swedish National Data Service (SND)


    JULY 2021

    ICOSRP 2021: International Conference on Open Science Research Philosophy
    19.07.21 – 20.07.21, Helsinki (Finland)
    “All aspects of Open Science Research Philosophy.”
    Organised by: International Research Conference


    SEPTEMBER 2021

    OA-Tage 2021
    27.09.21 – 29.09.21 Bern (Switzerland)
    “Open Access und Open Science.”
    Organised by: open-access.network


    OCTOBER 2021

    FORCE2021
    18.10.21 – 20.10.21 San Sebastián (Spain)
    “At a FORCE11 annual conference stakeholders come together for an open discussion, on an even playing field, to talk about changing the ways scholarly and scientific information is communicated, shared and used. Researchers, publishers, librarians, computer scientists, informaticians, funders, educators, citizens, and others attend the FORCE11 meeting with a view to supporting the realization of promising new ideas and identifying new potential collaborators.”
    Organised by: Force11


    Events 2021: How to stay up to date

    These are our event tips for the Open Science and library world for 2021. Of course, there will be more exciting conferences, workshops, barcamps and other formats in the course of the year. We will collect them for you in our event calendar on ZBW MediaTalk! To keep up to date with interesting events, you can either check there from time to time or subscribe to our newsletter, in which we will regularly inform you about new highlights on the Open Science and library event horizon: sign up for the ZBW MediaTalk newsletter.

    Is an event missing?

    Do you have an event tip that is not yet listed in our event calendar? Then we would be happy if you would let us know.

    Further reading tips for event organisers:

    Do you organise events yourself and are looking for tips on how to make them even better? We have been dealing with this more frequently lately:

    Decision-making aids for event attendance: highlights 2020

    Despite Corona, there were many conferences, workshops, barcamps & co. worth visiting in 2020. We wrote about some of them in ZBW MediaTalk. So if you are thinking about attending one of the events we recommend, our review will certainly help you make your decision:

    References Portrait: Photo Claudia Sittner©

    This text has been translated from German.

    The post Open Science & Libraries 2021: 20 Tips for Conferences, Barcamps & Co. first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.The post Open Science & Libraries 2021: 20 Tips for Conferences, Barcamps & Co. first appeared on Leibniz Research Alliance Open Science.