传播学学者如何看待开放学术

Q1 Social Sciences
N. Bowman, E. M. Rinke, Eun-Ju Lee, Robin L. Nabi, Claes H. de Vreese
{"title":"传播学学者如何看待开放学术","authors":"N. Bowman, E. M. Rinke, Eun-Ju Lee, Robin L. Nabi, Claes H. de Vreese","doi":"10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While perspectives on open scholarship practices (OSPs) in Communication are noted in editorials and position papers, as a discipline we lack data-driven insights into how the larger community understands, feels about, engages in, and supports OSPs – insights that could inform current conversations about OSPs in Communication and document how the field shifts in response to ongoing discourses around OS in the current moment. A mixed-methodological survey of International Communication Association members (N = 330) suggested widespread familiarity with and support for some OSPs, but less engagement with them. In open-ended responses, respondents expressed several concerns, including reservations about unclear standards, presumed incompatibility with scholarly approaches, fears of a misuse of shared materials, and perceptions of a toxic culture surrounding open scholarship.","PeriodicalId":36859,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the International Communication Association","volume":"19 1","pages":"205 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How communication scholars see open scholarship\",\"authors\":\"N. Bowman, E. M. Rinke, Eun-Ju Lee, Robin L. Nabi, Claes H. de Vreese\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT While perspectives on open scholarship practices (OSPs) in Communication are noted in editorials and position papers, as a discipline we lack data-driven insights into how the larger community understands, feels about, engages in, and supports OSPs – insights that could inform current conversations about OSPs in Communication and document how the field shifts in response to ongoing discourses around OS in the current moment. A mixed-methodological survey of International Communication Association members (N = 330) suggested widespread familiarity with and support for some OSPs, but less engagement with them. In open-ended responses, respondents expressed several concerns, including reservations about unclear standards, presumed incompatibility with scholarly approaches, fears of a misuse of shared materials, and perceptions of a toxic culture surrounding open scholarship.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the International Communication Association\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"205 - 230\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the International Communication Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the International Communication Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

虽然关于传播学开放学术实践(oss)的观点在社论和立场文件中得到了注意,但作为一门学科,我们缺乏数据驱动的见解,以了解更大的社区如何理解、感受、参与和支持oss——这些见解可以为当前关于传播学开放学术实践的对话提供信息,并记录该领域如何响应当前围绕OS的持续话语而发生变化。对国际传播协会成员(N = 330)进行的一项混合方法调查表明,人们普遍熟悉和支持一些osp,但与它们的接触较少。在开放式的回答中,受访者表达了一些担忧,包括对不明确的标准的保留意见,与学术方法的假定不兼容,对滥用共享材料的恐惧,以及对围绕开放学术的有毒文化的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How communication scholars see open scholarship
ABSTRACT While perspectives on open scholarship practices (OSPs) in Communication are noted in editorials and position papers, as a discipline we lack data-driven insights into how the larger community understands, feels about, engages in, and supports OSPs – insights that could inform current conversations about OSPs in Communication and document how the field shifts in response to ongoing discourses around OS in the current moment. A mixed-methodological survey of International Communication Association members (N = 330) suggested widespread familiarity with and support for some OSPs, but less engagement with them. In open-ended responses, respondents expressed several concerns, including reservations about unclear standards, presumed incompatibility with scholarly approaches, fears of a misuse of shared materials, and perceptions of a toxic culture surrounding open scholarship.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
×
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