Dataset Information

Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions.

ABSTRACT: Reproducible research and open science practices have the potential to accelerate scientific progress by allowing others to reuse research outputs, and by promoting rigorous research that is more likely to yield trustworthy results. However, these practices are uncommon in many fields, so there is a clear need for training that helps and encourages researchers to integrate reproducible research and open science practices into their daily work. Here, we outline eleven strategies for making training in these practices the norm at research institutions. The strategies, which emerged from a virtual brainstorming event organized in collaboration with the German Reproducibility Network, are concentrated in three areas: (i) adapting research assessment criteria and program requirements; (ii) training; (iii) building communities. We provide a brief overview of each strategy, offer tips for implementation, and provide links to resources. We also highlight the importance of allocating resources and monitoring impact. Our goal is to encourage researchers - in their roles as scientists, supervisors, mentors, instructors, and members of curriculum, hiring or evaluation committees - to think creatively about the many ways they can promote reproducible research and open science practices in their institutions.

SUBMITTER: Kohrs FE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10666927 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions.

Kohrs Friederike E FE Auer Susann S Bannach-Brown Alexandra A Fiedler Susann S Haven Tamarinde Laura TL Heise Verena V Holman Constance C Azevedo Flavio F Bernard René R Bleier Arnim A Bössel Nicole N Cahill Brian Patrick BP Castro Leyla Jael LJ Ehrenhofer Adrian A Eichel Kristina K Frank Maximillian M Frick Claudia C Friese Malte M Gärtner Anne A Gierend Kerstin K Grüning David Joachim DJ Hahn Lena L Hülsemann Maren M Ihle Malika M Illius Sabrina S König Laura L König Matthias M Kulke Louisa L Kutlin Anton A Lammers Fritjof F Mehler David M A DMA Miehl Christoph C Müller-Alcazar Anett A Neuendorf Claudia C Niemeyer Helen H Pargent Florian F Peikert Aaron A Pfeuffer Christina U CU Reinecke Robert R Röer Jan Philipp JP Rohmann Jessica L JL Sánchez-Tójar Alfredo A Scherbaum Stefan S Sixtus Elena E Spitzer Lisa L Straßburger Vera Maren VM Weber Marcel M Whitmire Clarissa J CJ Zerna Josephine J Zorbek Dilara D Zumstein Philipp P Weissgerber Tracey L TL

eLife 20231123

Reproducible research and open science practices have the potential to accelerate scientific progress by allowing others to reuse research outputs, and by promoting rigorous research that is more likely to yield trustworthy results. However, these practices are uncommon in many fields, so there is a clear need for training that helps and encourages researchers to integrate reproducible research and open science practices into their daily work. Here, we outline eleven strategies for making traini ...[more]

PMID: 37994903

Similar Datasets

Project description:The article describes the results of the online survey on open science (OS) carried out on researchers affiliated with universities and Spanish research centres and focused on open access to scientific publications, the publication process, the management of research data and the review of open articles. The main objective was to identify the perception and habits of researchers with regard to practices closely linked to open science and the scientific value added is that offers an in-depth picture of researchers as one of the main actors to whom this transformation and implementation of open science will fall. It focuses on the different aspects of OS: open access, open data, publication process and open review in order to identify habits and perceptions. This is to make possible an implementation of the OS movement. The survey was carried out among researchers who had published in the years 2020-2021, according to data obtained from WoS. It was emailed to a total of 8,188 researchers and obtained a total of 666 responses, of which 554 were complete, the rest being forms with some questions unanswered. The main results showed that open access still requires the diffusion of practices and services provided by the institution, as well as training (library or equivalent service) and institutional support from the competent authorities (vice rectors or equivalent) in specific aspects such as data management. In the case of data, around 50% of respondents stated they had stored data in a repository, and of all the options, the most frequently given was that of an institutional repository, followed by a discipline repository. Among the main reasons for doing this, we found transparency, visibility of data and the ability to validate results. For those who stated they had never stored data, the most frequent reasons for not having done so were privacy and confidentiality, the lack of a mandated data policy or a lack of knowledge of how to do it. In terms of open peer review, participants mentioned a certain reticence to the opening of evaluations due to potential conflicts of interest that may arise or because lower-quality content might be accepted in order to avoid conflicts. In addition, the hierarchical structure of senior researcher versus junior researcher might affect reviews. The main conclusions indicate a need for persuasion of OA to take place; APCs are an economic barrier rather than the main criterion for journal selection; OPR practices may seem innovative and emerging; scientific and evaluation policies seem to have a clear effect on the behaviour of researchers; researchers state that they share research data more for reasons of persuasion than out of obligation. Researchers do question the pathways or difficulties that may arise on a day-to-day basis and seem aware that we are undergoing change, where academic evaluation or policies related to open science, its implementation and habits among researchers may change. In this sense, more and better support is needed on the part of institutions and faculty support services.

Dataset Information

Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions.

Publications

Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets