Development and preliminary validation of an open access, open data and open outreach indicator.

Frontiers in research metrics and analytics Pub Date : 2023-09-07 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frma.2023.1218213
Evgenios Vlachos, Regine Ejstrup, Thea Marie Drachen, Bertil Fabricius Dorch
{"title":"Development and preliminary validation of an open access, open data and open outreach indicator.","authors":"Evgenios Vlachos,&nbsp;Regine Ejstrup,&nbsp;Thea Marie Drachen,&nbsp;Bertil Fabricius Dorch","doi":"10.3389/frma.2023.1218213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We present the development and preliminary validation of a new person-centered indicator that we propose is named \"OADO\" after its target concepts: Open Access (OA), Open Data (OD) and Open Outreach (OO). The indicator is comprised of two factors: the research factor indicating the degree of OA articles and OD in research; and the communication factor indicating the degree of OO in communication activities in which a researcher has participated. We stipulate that the weighted version of this new indicator, the Weighted-OADO, can be used to assess the openness of researchers in relation to their peers from their own discipline, department, or even group/center. The OADO is developed and customized to the needs of Elsevier's Research Information Management System (RIMS) environment, Pure. This offers the advantage of more accurate interpretations and recommendations for action, as well as the possibility to be implemented (and further validated) by multiple institutions, allowing disciplinary comparisons of the open practices across multiple institutes. Therefore, the OADO provides recommendations for action, and enables institutes to make informed decisions based on the indicator's outcome. To test the validity of the OADO, we retrieved the Pure publication records from two departments for each of the five faculties of the University of Southern Denmark and calculated the OADO of 995 researchers in total. We checked for definition validity, actionability, transferability, possibility of unexpected discontinuities of the indicator, factor independence, normality of the indicator's distributions across the departments, and indicator reliability. Our findings reveal that the OADO is a reliable indicator for departments with normally distributed values with regards to their Weighted-OADO. Unfortunately, only two departments displayed normal distributions, one from the health sciences and one from engineering. For departments where the normality assumption is not satisfied, the OADO can still be useful as it can indicate the need for making a greater effort toward openness, and/or act as an incentive for detailed registration of research outputs and datasets.</p>","PeriodicalId":73104,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","volume":"8 ","pages":"1218213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10512940/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1218213","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We present the development and preliminary validation of a new person-centered indicator that we propose is named "OADO" after its target concepts: Open Access (OA), Open Data (OD) and Open Outreach (OO). The indicator is comprised of two factors: the research factor indicating the degree of OA articles and OD in research; and the communication factor indicating the degree of OO in communication activities in which a researcher has participated. We stipulate that the weighted version of this new indicator, the Weighted-OADO, can be used to assess the openness of researchers in relation to their peers from their own discipline, department, or even group/center. The OADO is developed and customized to the needs of Elsevier's Research Information Management System (RIMS) environment, Pure. This offers the advantage of more accurate interpretations and recommendations for action, as well as the possibility to be implemented (and further validated) by multiple institutions, allowing disciplinary comparisons of the open practices across multiple institutes. Therefore, the OADO provides recommendations for action, and enables institutes to make informed decisions based on the indicator's outcome. To test the validity of the OADO, we retrieved the Pure publication records from two departments for each of the five faculties of the University of Southern Denmark and calculated the OADO of 995 researchers in total. We checked for definition validity, actionability, transferability, possibility of unexpected discontinuities of the indicator, factor independence, normality of the indicator's distributions across the departments, and indicator reliability. Our findings reveal that the OADO is a reliable indicator for departments with normally distributed values with regards to their Weighted-OADO. Unfortunately, only two departments displayed normal distributions, one from the health sciences and one from engineering. For departments where the normality assumption is not satisfied, the OADO can still be useful as it can indicate the need for making a greater effort toward openness, and/or act as an incentive for detailed registration of research outputs and datasets.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

制定并初步验证开放获取、开放数据和开放外联指标。
我们提出了一个新的以人为中心的指标,该指标以其目标概念命名为“OADO”:开放访问(OA)、开放数据(OD)和开放外联(OO)。该指标由两个因素组成:研究因素表示OA文章和OD在研究中的程度;以及表示研究人员参与的通信活动中OO程度的通信因素。我们规定,这一新指标的加权版本,加权OADO,可以用来评估研究人员相对于自己学科、部门甚至小组/中心的同行的开放性。OADO是根据爱思唯尔研究信息管理系统(RIMS)环境Pure的需求开发和定制的。这提供了更准确的解释和行动建议的优势,以及由多个机构实施(并进一步验证)的可能性,允许对多个机构的公开做法进行学科比较。因此,OADO提供了行动建议,并使研究机构能够根据指标的结果做出明智的决定。为了测试OADO的有效性,我们从南丹麦大学五个学院的两个系检索了Pure出版记录,并计算了总共995名研究人员的OADO。我们检查了定义的有效性、可操作性、可转移性、指标意外不连续的可能性、因素独立性、指标在各部门分布的正态性以及指标的可靠性。我们的研究结果表明,对于加权OADO具有正态分布值的部门来说,OADO是一个可靠的指标。不幸的是,只有两个部门显示出正态分布,一个来自卫生科学部门,一个则来自工程部门。对于不满足正常性假设的部门,OADO仍然是有用的,因为它可以表明需要在开放方面做出更大的努力,和/或作为对研究成果和数据集详细注册的激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信