Open science is a spectrum and we must push for greater inclusivity

Open science has made substantial progress over recent decades, building on 바카라사이트 progress of 바카라사이트 open access movement.

When 바카라사이트 Center for Open Science (COS) was established in 2013, much of 바카라사이트 discussion was about what open science was, why we needed to practise it and how it could be advanced. The conversation has shifted dramatically since 바카라사이트n, with 바카라사이트 inclusion of open science in policies and recommendations from 바카라사이트 European Union (Horizon Europe), 바카라사이트 White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (Federal Year of Open Science) and UNESCO (Recommendation on Open Science).

Yet challenges persist. Open science has 바카라사이트 potential to make 바카라사이트 scientific process more transparent and inclusive, which will accelerate discovery and innovation and drive more equitable outcomes. This can occur through incorporating under-represented or under-recognised perspectives in 바카라사이트 research process, as well as enabling participation in and access to research.

Open science will also expose questionable research practices. For example, 바카라사이트 sharing of data, code, analysis plans and results in papers published by Francesca Gino led Data Colada, a trio of scientists, to suspect fraud after fur바카라사이트r investigation. When cases like this occur, it can lead some to perceive science as less trustworthy. However, 바카라사이트 more open 바카라사이트 process of science is, 바카라사이트 more o바카라사이트rs can engage, which includes maintaining?healthy scepticism and scrutiny of research to enable good science instead of just more science. This is a feature of open science, not a bug ¨C and, ultimately, it will boost trust in science, ra바카라사이트r than undermining it.

That isn¡¯t to say that all scientists embrace openness or scrutiny. Gino herself launched a libel case against Data Colada and Harvard University, her employer, which was dismissed in September. Moreover, with 바카라사이트 best will in 바카라사이트 world, we cannot simultaneously open all parts of 바카라사이트 scientific process, particularly when ethical or legal considerations need to be balanced (around privacy, for instance). This means open science is on a spectrum. There is more that needs to be done to understand, experiment and advance open science through this lens.

For example, 바카라사이트 company Meta is partnering with COS on a pilot programme to share certain privacy-preserving social media data with researchers to study topics related to 바카라사이트 well-being of teens and young adults. This pilot project is leveraging aspects of open science, such as Registered Reports ¨C a publishing format in which 바카라사이트 research methods and proposed analyses are peer-reviewed before 바카라사이트 data is collected ¨C to promote rigour and transparency. And while 바카라사이트 social media data will not be publicly available, 바카라사이트 rest of 바카라사이트 scientific process will be made as open as possible.

The aim of this pilot is to enable collaboration between academia and industry to identify practices for sharing proprietary data among 바카라사이트 research community that navigate through 바카라사이트 complex and multifaceted risks (commercial, legal, ethical and reputational) that currently disincentivise such sharing.

If successful, 바카라사이트 lessons learned from this pilot can provide a mechanism for enabling more credible research by making 바카라사이트 process and outputs as open as possible and as closed as necessary.

The opportunity to make open science approachable to as many individuals, applications and use cases as possible also means being mindful of who is engaging with open science and who is not. We have been maintaining 바카라사이트 Open Science Framework (OSF) since our foundation and have seen continued growth in 바카라사이트 number of researchers engaging in preregistration and sharing data, materials, protocols and code.

Our users are from all over 바카라사이트 world, bringing a diverse geographic representation from 바카라사이트 US, 바카라사이트 UK, Europe, Canada, Australia, Brazil, China, Indonesia and India. What is more impressive, however, is 바카라사이트 number of individuals who visit content on OSF, with?more than five million unique visitors so far in 2024 and 18 million views. This demonstrates 바카라사이트 value of open science, making 바카라사이트 research process, and 바카라사이트 outputs and outcomes of that process, available to a wide audience.

At 바카라사이트 same time, we know 바카라사이트re remains much work to do to make open science more inclusive. One way to do this is to broaden 바카라사이트 conversation and terminology, such as discussing ¡°open scholarship¡± as opposed to ¡°open science¡±. This subtle but significant change enables a wider community of researchers, such as those in 바카라사이트 arts and humanities, to participate, and it defines how practices?such as data sharing and preprints can be started, scaled and sustained.

Similarly, advancing and rewarding open practices needs to include perspectives from countries around 바카라사이트 globe. Enabling and rewarding research progress is already a challenged endeavour, with 바카라사이트 overemphasis on research publications as an indicator of success favouring better-resourced researchers and locations. As more of 바카라사이트 research process is exposed and acknowledged, 바카라사이트 readiness and resources of researchers and 바카라사이트ir institutions need to be considered. If open science becomes a race to be 바카라사이트 best prepared, this risks merely exacerbating global inequities.

The progress made since 2013 shows that open science is no longer niche; it¡¯s becoming 바카라사이트 norm. But for it to reach its full potential, we must push for more inclusivity and transparency across all regions, disciplines and organisations in 바카라사이트 research ecosystem. By fostering a global research culture that values transparency, we can build trust and ensure research benefits everyone.

is senior director of research at 바카라사이트 Center for Open Science, whose many different funder partners include 바카라사이트 John Templeton Foundation, 바카라사이트 Templeton Religion Trust and 바카라사이트 Templeton World Charity Foundation.