Laurent Gatto Computational Proteomics Unit https://lgatto.github.io University of Cambridge email@example.com @lgatt0
These slides are available under a creative common CC-BY license. You are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, even commercially.
Any research output should be
Mertonian norms of Science (1942)
Are these imperatives in line with current practice?
Open is better, and we should always aim for the better, not the worse.
Why would anyone not want to do open research?
If research is the by-product of researchers getting promoted (David Barron), then shouldn’t we, early career researchers (ECRs), focus on promotion and being docile academic citizens rather than aiming for the more noble cause of pursuing research to understand the world that surrounds us, and disseminate our findings using modern channels?
Barriers are not technological, but rather socio-cultural and political.
Open science/research is particularly important for ECRs. Open research practices are here, and won’t go away. It is clear that they will increase in the near future. If you, as an ECR, want to be a competitive researcher in the coming years (and you’ll need to be), you’ll need to be well versed in open research practices.
The EU’s Evaluation of Research Careers fully acknowledging Open Science Practice defines an Open Science Career Assessment Matrix (OS-CAM):
Reproducibility and open science are starting to matter in tenure and promotion July 14th, 2017, Brian Nosek
In any case, my experience with promotion review requests this summer suggests that change is occurring, particularly in assigning scholarly value to open science contributions and behavior, and it’s great to see.