Barriers to Full Participation in the Open Science Life Cycle among Early Career Researchers

Collaborating for Impact: Navigating Partnerships and Overcoming Challenges across the Sustainable Development Goals

We illustrate the importance of early career perspectives and diverse partnerships to develop solutions and overcome key challenges to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Guidance framework to apply best practices in ecological data analysis: lessons learned from building Galaxy-Ecology

Numerous conceptual frameworks exist for best practices in research data and analysis (e.g., Open Science and FAIR principles). In practice, there is a need for further progress to improve transparency, reproducibility, and confidence in ecology. Here, we propose a practical and operational framework for researchers and experts in ecology to achieve best practices for building analytical procedures from individual research projects to production-level analytical pipelines. We introduce the concept of atomization to identify analytical steps that support generalization by allowing us to go beyond single analyses. The term atomization is employed to convey the idea of single analytical steps as "atoms" composing an analytical procedure. When generalized, "atoms" can be used in more than a single case analysis. These guidelines were established during the development of the Galaxy-Ecology initiative, a web platform dedicated to data analysis in ecology. Galaxy-Ecology allows us to demonstrate a way to reach higher levels of reproducibility in ecological sciences by increasing the accessibility and reusability of analytical workflows once atomized and generalized.

Welcoming More Participation in Open Data Science for the Oceans

Open science is a global movement happening across all research fields. Enabled by technology and the open web, it builds on years of efforts by individuals, grassroots organizations, institutions, and agencies. The goal is to share knowledge and broaden participation in science, from early ideation to making research outputs openly accessible to all (open access). With an emphasis on transparency and collaboration, the open science movement dovetails with efforts to increase diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in science and society. The US Biden-Harris Administration and many other US government agencies have declared 2023 the Year of Open Science, providing a great opportunity to boost participation in open science for the oceans. For researchers day-to-day, open science is a critical piece of modern analytical workflows with increasing amounts of data. Therefore, we focus this article on open data science-the tooling and people enabling reproducible, transparent, inclusive practices for data-intensive research-and its intersection with the marine sciences. We discuss the state of various dimensions of open science and argue that technical advancements have outpaced our field's culture change to incorporate them. Increasing inclusivity and technical skill building are interlinked and must be prioritized within the marine science community to find collaborative solutions for responding to climate change and other threats to marine biodiversity and society.

Open science

The term 'open science' refers to a range of methods, tools, platforms and practices that aim to make scientific research more accessible, transparent, reproducible and reliable. This includes, for example, sharing code, data and research materials, embracing new publishing formats such as registered reports and preprints, pursuing replication studies and reanalyses, optimising statistical approaches to improve evidence assessment and re-evaluating institutional incentives. The ongoing shift towards open science practices is partly due to mounting evidence that studies across disciplines suffer from biases, underpowered designs and irreproducible or non-replicable results. It also stems from a general desire amongst many researchers to reduce hyper-competitivity in science and instead promote collaborative research that benefits science and society.

Experiences with a training DSW knowledge model for early-stage researchers

Background: Data management is fast becoming an essential part of scientific practice, driven by open science and FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable) data sharing requirements. Whilst data management plans (DMPs) are clear to data management experts and data stewards, understandings of their purpose and creation are often obscure to the producers of the data, which in academic environments are often PhD students. Methods: Within the RNAct EU Horizon 2020 ITN project, we engaged the 10 RNAct early-stage researchers (ESRs) in a training project aimed at formulating a DMP. To do so, we used the Data Stewardship Wizard (DSW) framework and modified the existing Life Sciences Knowledge Model into a simplified version aimed at training young scientists, with computational or experimental backgrounds, in core data management principles. We collected feedback from the ESRs during this exercise. Results: Here, we introduce our new life-sciences training DMP template for young scientists. We report and discuss our experiences as principal investigators (PIs) and ESRs during this project and address the typical difficulties that are encountered in developing and understanding a DMP. Conclusions: We found that the DS-wizard can also be an appropriate tool for DMP training, to get terminology and concepts across to researchers. A full training in addition requires an upstream step to present basic DMP concepts and a downstream step to publish a dataset in a (public) repository. Overall, the DS-Wizard tool was essential for our DMP training and we hope our efforts can be used in other projects.

The Chinese Open Science Network (COSN): Building an Open Science Community From Scratch

Open Science is becoming a mainstream scientific ideology in psychology and related fields. However, researchers, especially early-career researchers (ECRs) in developing countries, are facing significant hurdles in engaging in Open Science and moving it forward. In China, various societal and cultural factors discourage ECRs from participating in Open Science, such as the lack of dedicated communication channels and the norm of modesty. To make the voice of Open Science heard by Chinese-speaking ECRs and scholars at large, the Chinese Open Science Network (COSN) was initiated in 2016. With its core values being grassroots-oriented, diversity, and inclusivity, COSN has grown from a small Open Science interest group to a recognized network both in the Chinese-speaking research community and the international Open Science community. So far, COSN has organized three in-person workshops, 12 tutorials, 48 talks, and 55 journal club sessions and translated 15 Open Science-related articles and blogs from English to Chinese. Currently, the main social media account of COSN (i.e., the WeChat Official Account) has more than 23,000 subscribers, and more than 1,000 researchers/students actively participate in the discussions on Open Science. In this article, we share our experience in building such a network to encourage ECRs in developing countries to start their own Open Science initiatives and engage in the global Open Science movement. We foresee great collaborative efforts of COSN together with all other local and international networks to further accelerate the Open Science movement.

Why don't we share data and code? Perceived barriers and benefits to public archiving practices

The biological sciences community is increasingly recognizing the value of open, reproducible and transparent research practices for science and society at large. Despite this recognition, many researchers fail to share their data and code publicly. This pattern may arise from knowledge barriers about how to archive data and code, concerns about its reuse, and misaligned career incentives. Here, we define, categorize and discuss barriers to data and code sharing that are relevant to many research fields. We explore how real and perceived barriers might be overcome or reframed in the light of the benefits relative to costs. By elucidating these barriers and the contexts in which they arise, we can take steps to mitigate them and align our actions with the goals of open science, both as individual scientists and as a scientific community.

Finding the best fit for improving reproducibility: reflections from the QUEST Center for Responsible Research

Increasing the reproducibility and trustworthiness of biomedical research requires engaging stakeholders from all levels in an institutional setting. The QUEST Center for Responsible Research aims to develop and implement new approaches to improve the culture and practice of research, tailored to the needs of these stakeholders. Members of the QUEST Center organised a brainstorm to reflect on the challenges and new opportunities encountered in implementing different projects through QUEST and share the lessons that working groups have learned over the first five years. The authors informally surveyed and interviewed working groups where relevant and highlight common themes that have influenced the success of many projects, including top-down and bottom-up engagement, managing expectations, the availability of expertise, ensuring sustainability, and considering incentives. The commentary authors conclude by encouraging the research community to view initiatives that promote reproducibility not as a one-size-fits-all undertaking, but rather as an opportunity to unite stakeholders and customise drivers of cultural change.