Skip to main content
Video
Create Clip
Add To List
Share

Open Science: catch phrase, or a better way of doing research?

Abstract
Open Science, as defined by UNESCO’s Recommendation approved November 2021, states it as “an inclusive construct that combines various movements and practices aiming to make multilingual scientific knowledge openly available, accessible and reusable for everyone, to increase scientific collaborations and sharing of information for the benefits of science and society”. The key pillars start with “open scientific knowledge” that includes scientific publications, research data, open-source software and source code, and hardware.

As publishers we have an opportunity, perhaps even an invitation, to better collaborate with scientific data repositories, software development platforms, and hardware manufacturers to consider what the workflows of open science could and should enable for researchers and ways we can help support these efforts.

In this session we will explore the anticipated benefits that Open Science will have on complex cross-domain challenges, bringing more inclusion and equity for researchers in low- and middle-income countries, and encourage more co-design and co-development of research efforts with those impacted by the research outcomes.

NISO Discourse Discussion for this session
https://discourse.niso.org/t/open-science-catch-phrase-or-a-better-way-of-doing-research/602
Filter
Open Science, as defined by UNESCO’s Recommendation approved November 2021, states it as “an inclusive construct that combines various movements and practices aiming to make multilingual scientific knowledge openly available, accessible and reusable for everyone, to increase scientific collaborations and sharing of information for the benefits of science and society”. The key pillars start with “open scientific knowledge” that includes scientific publications, research data, open-source software and source code, and hardware.
As publishers we have an opportunity, perhaps even an invitation, to better collaborate with scientific data repositories, software development platforms, and hardware manufacturers to consider what the workflows of open science could and should enable for researchers and ways we can help support these efforts.
In this session we will explore the anticipated benefits that Open Science will have on complex cross-domain challenges, bringing more inclusion and equity for researchers in low- and middle-income countries, and encourage more co-design and co-development of research efforts with those impacted by the research outcomes.
The NISO Plus conference brings people together from across the global information community to share updates and participate in conversations about our shared challenges and opportunities. The focus is on identifying concrete next steps to improve information flow and interoperability, and help solve existing and potential future problems. Please join us to help address the key issues facing our community of librarians, publishers, researchers, and more — today and tomorrow!
Dr. Rebecca Grant is Head of Data & Software Publishing at F1000, where she supports the development of guidance, policy and publishing methods to encourage researchers to share open and FAIR research data. She has a background in data management for the humanities and social sciences and was previously based at the Digital Repository of Ireland and the National Library of Ireland. She is a qualified Open Data trainer certified by the Open Data Institute. Her doctoral thesis explored the connections between archival theory and research data management practice, using Ireland as a case study.
Jennifer Gibson is Executive Director of Dryad, the open data publishing platform and community committed to the reuse of all research data. Since 2005, she has worked with scientists, funders, publishers, libraries, developers and others to explore fresh paths toward accelerating discovery through open research communication and open-technology innovation. Prior to Dryad, Jennifer was Head of Open Research Communication and founding Head of Marketing and Communications for eLife, a non-profit and research funder-backed initiative to transform science publishing. She is currently Chair of the Board of Directors for OASPA.
Oya Y. Rieger is a senior strategist on Ithaka S+R’s Libraries, Scholarly Communication, and Museums team. She spearheads projects that reexamine the curation and preservation missions of cultural heritage organizations and explore sustainability models for open scholarship. Prior to joining Ithaka S+R, Rieger served as Associate University Librarian at Cornell University Library overseeing digital scholarship, preservation, collection development and scholarly publishing programs. As digital preservation has been a central point of her 25-year career, she has contributed to a range of international initiatives to design, develop, and assess digital preservation initiatives and training programs. With a B.A in Economics (Middle East Technical University, Turkey), she holds an M.S. in Public Administration (University of Oklahoma, US), an M.S. in Information Systems (Columbia University, US), and a Ph.D. in Human-Computer Interaction (Cornell University, US).
Shelley Stall is the Senior Director for the American Geophysical Union’s Data Leadership Program. She works with AGU’s members, their organizations, and the broader research community to improve data and digital object practices with the ultimate goal of elevating how research data and software are managed and valued. Better data management results in better science.
​​Dr. Yongjuan Zhang is an associate research librarian of Shanghai Information Center for Life Science, CAS, where she supports the development of linked data, smart data, knowledge graph and providing knowledge services to scientists. She has a background in data management for the life and medicine sciences. Her doctoral thesis explored the model of Open Dynamic Semantic Publishing (ODSP) based on smart data.
Machine-readable metadata makes it possible to draw connections between the various stakeholders and phases of the research process from the time a scholar submits their work for peer review through publication. There's just one big challenge — getting that information to "go with the flow" of publishing and remain clean, correct, and complete along the way. And there's a lot to keep up with, from established metadata standards like Persistent Identifiers to new ones under development like the Peer Review Taxonomy. In this session, we'll discuss steps scholarly publishers can take to improve the flow of metadata from the point of peer review, including: How author education can lead to better metadata quality and linking Ways to bridge peer review and production gaps to keep metadata moving forward The potential of digital-first production processes to streamline metadata creation and dissemination and the latest developments
Libraries, museums, and archives have increasing dependency on not-for-profit and commercial digital platforms such as Preservica, MetaArchive, APTrust, Samvera to support the curation, discovery, and management of digital content. The long-term stewardship of digital materials depends not only on the technical resiliency of preservation systems, but also on the strength of financial and organizational sustainability of these systems and their providers and their ability to meet the needs of their clients (user base). With funding from the Institute of Library and Museum Services (IMLS), Ithaka S+R is conducting a 2-year research project to examine and assess how digital preservation systems are developed, deployed, and sustained. The purpose of the presentation is to discuss the sustainability attributes for assessing the effectiveness and durability of preservation and curation systems and stewarding organizations. After sharing the study’s key findings, there will be a roundtable discussion about the key challenges in selecting and implementing digital preservation and curation systems from the heritage sector’s perspective.
The growth in the use of preprints has brought with it interest in preprint review initiatives. Preprint review provides benefits for authors in the form of early feedback, and holds promise to make peer review more inclusive by allowing groups generally less included in journal review (e.g. early career researchers, those from underrepresented groups) to participate. However, cultural barriers remain for participation in public preprint feedback: authors worry about unfair criticism and how it may influence a journal editor’s evaluation; reviewers fear retribution and harm to their reputation if they post critiques or comments others may perceive as uninformed, a concern particularly important when commenting on the work by someone in a position of greater power.

In this session, we will discuss ongoing initiatives to address cultural barriers to public preprint review, and potential steps to pave the way for a more positive and inclusive ecosystem of feedback on research outputs. The speakers will discuss the FAST principles for behaviours in creating and responding to preprint feedback, as well as the experience of publishers and preprint review platforms in developing skills and incentives aiming to drive participation by a diverse group of communities.

NISO Discourse Discussion for this session
https://discourse.niso.org/t/preprint-review-addressing-cultural-barriers-on-the-path-for-a-more-positive-and-inclusive-review-ecosystem/574
Open research infrastructures are playing an increasingly critical role at all stages of the research life cycle, from grant application through dissemination and evaluation. However, funding for these infrastructures is, at best, patchy. Most infrastructure organizations rely on community support, such as membership, and/or, in some cases, grants. Ensuring that these organizations are fully sustainable will take long-term, reliable investment. In this session we'll look at some of the ways this sort of investment is - or could be - happening, and who is - or should be - involved.

NISO Discourse Discussion for this session
https://discourse.niso.org/t/the-importance-of-investment-in-open-research-infrastructure/569