How Do Scientists Define Openness? Exploring the Relationship Between Open Science Policies and Research Practice

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Nadine Levin, S. Leonelli, Dagmara Weckowska, D. Castle, J. Dupré
{"title":"How Do Scientists Define Openness? Exploring the Relationship Between Open Science Policies and Research Practice","authors":"Nadine Levin, S. Leonelli, Dagmara Weckowska, D. Castle, J. Dupré","doi":"10.1177/0270467616668760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article documents how biomedical researchers in the United Kingdom understand and enact the idea of “openness.” This is of particular interest to researchers and science policy worldwide in view of the recent adoption of pioneering policies on Open Science and Open Access by the U.K. government—policies whose impact on and implications for research practice are in need of urgent evaluation, so as to decide on their eventual implementation elsewhere. This study is based on 22 in-depth interviews with U.K. researchers in systems biology, synthetic biology, and bioinformatics, which were conducted between September 2013 and February 2014. Through an analysis of the interview transcripts, we identify seven core themes that characterize researchers’ understanding of openness in science and nine factors that shape the practice of openness in research. Our findings highlight the implications that Open Science policies can have for research processes and outcomes and provide recommendations for enhancing their content, effectiveness, and implementation.","PeriodicalId":38848,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"128 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0270467616668760","citationCount":"81","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467616668760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 81

Abstract

This article documents how biomedical researchers in the United Kingdom understand and enact the idea of “openness.” This is of particular interest to researchers and science policy worldwide in view of the recent adoption of pioneering policies on Open Science and Open Access by the U.K. government—policies whose impact on and implications for research practice are in need of urgent evaluation, so as to decide on their eventual implementation elsewhere. This study is based on 22 in-depth interviews with U.K. researchers in systems biology, synthetic biology, and bioinformatics, which were conducted between September 2013 and February 2014. Through an analysis of the interview transcripts, we identify seven core themes that characterize researchers’ understanding of openness in science and nine factors that shape the practice of openness in research. Our findings highlight the implications that Open Science policies can have for research processes and outcomes and provide recommendations for enhancing their content, effectiveness, and implementation.
科学家如何定义开放性?探索开放科学政策与研究实践的关系
本文记录了英国生物医学研究人员是如何理解和实施“开放”理念的。鉴于英国政府最近在开放科学和开放获取方面采用了开创性的政策,这对全世界的研究人员和科学政策特别感兴趣,这些政策对研究实践的影响和含义需要紧急评估,以便决定最终在其他地方实施。本研究基于对英国系统生物学、合成生物学和生物信息学研究人员的22次深度访谈,访谈时间为2013年9月至2014年2月。通过对访谈记录的分析,我们确定了研究人员对科学开放性理解的七个核心主题,以及塑造研究开放性实践的九个因素。我们的研究结果强调了开放科学政策对研究过程和结果的影响,并为加强其内容、有效性和实施提供了建议。
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
Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society
Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society Arts and Humanities-History and Philosophy of Science
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
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