(except logo’s)

Changing research workflows Driving forces for openness, efficiency and reproducibility

Bianca Kramer & Jeroen Bosman

ICSTI-NISO joint webinar, October 26, 2016

@MsPhelps @jeroenbosman

Simple or complicated? A model of the research workflow

preparation

analysis

writing publication

outreach

assessment discovery

Rounds of grant writing and application

Iterations of search and reading

Drafting, receiving comments,rewriting

Submit, peer review, rejection, resubmitting

Rounds of experiments and measurements

Changing research workflows

Changing research workflows: company silos vs. open science

Open Science

y y y y Elsevier

y

Global survey 2015-2016

20,663 respondents

20,663 respondents

Data sharing

http://101innovations.wordpress.com

Dataset Data Note Scripts Dashboard

Open Science Framework (OSF)

Open Science Framework (OSF)

6021 respondents

Open Science Framework (OSF)

1237 OSF users

Open Science Framework (OSF): Disciplines

1237 OSF users

Open Science Framework (OSF): Research roles

1237 OSF users

What is their research workflow like?

What tools are used preferentially with OSF?

What tools are used preferentially with OSF?

What tools are used preferentially with OSF?

Archive/share data & code

What tools are used preferentially with OSF?

Read / view / annotate

OpenVIVO

Researcher profiles / author identifiers

13139 of 14896 researchers answered this question

Researcher profiles / author identifiers

% researchers using ORCID

Three goals for science & scholarship (G-E-O)

• declaring competing interests • replication & reproducibility • meaningful assessment • effective quality checks • credit where it is due • no fraud, plagiarism

• connected tools & platforms • no publ. size restrictions • null result publishing • speed of publication • (web)standards, IDs • semantic discovery • re-useability • versioning

open peer review •

open (lab)notes •

plain language •

open drafting •

open access •

CC-0/BY •

good

efficient open

technical changes & standards

research governance

changes

economic & copyright

changes

researcher

funder

publisher

public

government library

Three goals for science & scholarship (G-E-O)

good

efficient open

researcher

funder

publisher

public

government library

Tool usage: Good-Efficient-Open

Inform Support Advise, advocate (Co-)shape policies

e.g.: Info on website, in LibGuides, etc.

Offer training, Q&A What’s a good choice, why, what’s important

Think with institution, graduate schools, etc.

asks for:

Knowledge, organizing info

Communication skills, expertise

Advocating priorities, field-specific knowledge; a vision

Authority, role being accepted

Types / levels of research support

Constraining and enabling contexts for open and ‘good’ workflows

political support at (inter)national level •

pressure from funders •

public stance on Open Science by institution •

user-friendly and powerful tools •

interoperability •

role models •

attention for positive effects •

• assessment criteria • institutional policies/culture • PI demands • learning curves • agreements with collaborators • uncertainty over effects & legitimacy

“Openness and Outreach! Together with an efficient workflow and

minimal costs for researchers.

Impact should be shared with and created by the public. That is only possible with Open Science.”

http://101innovations.wordpress.com