Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Gaps between Open Science activities and actual recognition systems: Insights from an international survey

F. Grattarola, H. Shmagun, C. Erdmann, A. Cambon-Thomsen, M. Thomsen, J. Kim, L. Mabile

. 2024 ; 19 (12) : e0315632. [pub] 20241216

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article

There are global movements aiming to promote reform of the traditional research evaluation and reward systems. However, a comprehensive picture of the existing best practices and efforts across various institutions to integrate Open Science into these frameworks remains underdeveloped and not fully known. The aim of this study was to identify perceptions and expectations of various research communities worldwide regarding how Open Science activities are (or should be) formally recognised and rewarded. To achieve this, a global survey was conducted in the framework of the Research Data Alliance, recruiting 230 participants from five continents and 37 countries. Despite most participants reporting that their organisation had one form or another of formal Open Science policies, the majority indicated that their organisation lacks any initiative or tool that provides specific credits or rewards for Open Science activities. However, researchers from France, the United States, the Netherlands and Finland affirmed having such mechanisms in place. The study found that, among various Open Science activities, Open or FAIR data management and sharing stood out as especially deserving of explicit recognition and credit. Open Science indicators in research evaluation and/or career progression processes emerged as the most preferred type of reward.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25003022
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250206104018.0
007      
ta
008      
250121s2024 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1371/journal.pone.0315632 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39680530
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Grattarola, Florencia $u Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000182825732
245    10
$a Gaps between Open Science activities and actual recognition systems: Insights from an international survey / $c F. Grattarola, H. Shmagun, C. Erdmann, A. Cambon-Thomsen, M. Thomsen, J. Kim, L. Mabile
520    9_
$a There are global movements aiming to promote reform of the traditional research evaluation and reward systems. However, a comprehensive picture of the existing best practices and efforts across various institutions to integrate Open Science into these frameworks remains underdeveloped and not fully known. The aim of this study was to identify perceptions and expectations of various research communities worldwide regarding how Open Science activities are (or should be) formally recognised and rewarded. To achieve this, a global survey was conducted in the framework of the Research Data Alliance, recruiting 230 participants from five continents and 37 countries. Despite most participants reporting that their organisation had one form or another of formal Open Science policies, the majority indicated that their organisation lacks any initiative or tool that provides specific credits or rewards for Open Science activities. However, researchers from France, the United States, the Netherlands and Finland affirmed having such mechanisms in place. The study found that, among various Open Science activities, Open or FAIR data management and sharing stood out as especially deserving of explicit recognition and credit. Open Science indicators in research evaluation and/or career progression processes emerged as the most preferred type of reward.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a průzkumy a dotazníky $7 D011795
650    12
$a internacionalita $7 D038622
650    _2
$a výzkumní pracovníci $x psychologie $7 D012108
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Shmagun, Hanna $u Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Seoul, South Korea $1 https://orcid.org/0000000162712976
700    1_
$a Erdmann, Christopher $u SciLifeLab, Uppsala, Sweden $1 https://orcid.org/000000032554180X
700    1_
$a Cambon-Thomsen, Anne $u CERPOP, INSERM and Université de Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France $u CNRS, Toulouse, France
700    1_
$a Thomsen, Mogens $u CERPOP, INSERM and Université de Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France
700    1_
$a Kim, Jaesoo $u Hongik University, Seoul, South Korea
700    1_
$a Mabile, Laurence $u CERPOP, INSERM and Université de Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France $1 https://orcid.org/0000000277241721
773    0_
$w MED00180950 $t PloS one $x 1932-6203 $g Roč. 19, č. 12 (2024), s. e0315632
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39680530 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250121 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250206104014 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2263047 $s 1239029
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 19 $c 12 $d e0315632 $e 20241216 $i 1932-6203 $m PloS one $n PLoS One $x MED00180950
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250121

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...