Transparency and Openness in Science
E.J.Wagenmakers, Professor at the University of Amsterdam, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Transparency and openness are core academic values, and they express themselves in a range of helpful behaviors such as sharing of data, sharing of materials, and sharing of published work. In an ideal world, researchers also share their hypotheses before the data are collected, making it possible to discriminate between research that is hypothesis-generating versus research that is hypothesis-testing. In this presentation I stress the need for more academic transparency, and I discuss several recent developments that facilitate the practice of open science.
What’s so Open and Accessible About Open Access?
Rogier van Reekum, Academic Researcher at Erasmus University Rotterdam, Faculty of Social Sciences
The way research, whether produced by academics or not, is published and made public has always been changing. In recent decades, the ability to share research through the web has manifested itself as yet another one of those fundamental changes. ‘Open access’ has come out of this revolution as the central idea: no longer would audiences gain access to publications by paying for it. The rhetoric surrounding this development suggest that ‘knowledge’ is suddenly liberated and made available to anyone that might profit from it. In more than one way, this idea of what ‘open access’ is about is far too limited. First of all, ‘open access’ conceived as the free access to journal articles relates to a rather specific conduit through which publics are able to reach knowledge. The flow of knowledge works very differently in different fields, disciplines and scientific systems. Different kinds of research and knowledge production have different kinds of relationships to their publics. Some researchers talk to engineers or specific technical professions. Others talk to professional communities, such as lawyers, doctors, accountants and investors. Still others talk to social movements, citizens, municipalities, governments or journalists. What ‘open access’ may mean in any of these contexts is very different. Still, this raises the question why ‘open access’ is so often associated with the opening up of journals. This question brings me to my second reason for thinking that ‘open access’ ought to be conceived in a much broader discussion about doing academic work. For some time publishers, often large, multi-national corporations, exploited their positions in the political economy of the academy by obtaining content at almost no cost while charging copiously for access to that content. This is now changing. The model advocated by science policy agencies, however, contains many risks. I want to argue for a different model for journal publishing.
How to find a good (open) access journal? Start one yourself!
Arjan de Rooy, Collection Specialist Law and Social Sciences, VU University Library
- Short introduction to the primary Open Access publishing process a.k.a. ‘The Golden Road’ : business models, advantages, dilemmas, ranking, indexing, quality issues.
- Impact on scientific career ? No impact factor means no impact ?
- Quality issues ? A real problem ? Or is it a question of common sense ?
- Starting your own journal.