Pages

Monday, December 28, 2020

21 Tips on how to sound #openscience

Jon, RIP.


One of the things around Open Science is how some think they can use the term. To me, when I was introduced to the term, back in 1999, it was from a USA-centric view that originated from and based on the ideas of open source software: You can find this back in literature. There is even earlier literature that uses the term in a more economic context tho.

And this USA community defined Open Science as something that provided rights to users: the right to use it (normally with some minimal restrictions), the right to modify it (for example, to curate the output), and to redistribute the result. Sounds pretty useful to me. In fact, I think this is the core of just doing science. This is where the slogan "Open Science is just science done right" comes from, I guess.

However, like any buzzword, it quickly gets picked up by, ummm, creative people that like to take benefit from the popularity of the term. Creative enough to brand themselves as Open Science. Well, fairly, they have been openly fighting against Open Science. That's open science too, right? </not>

So, to raise a bit of awareness of what is important to keep in mind when doing Open Science and to encourage equity among users, I wanted to highlight some of the creative uses of the term I have seen, each one of them not really open science, but they sound like that. I hope to achieve it makes you wonder next time: "Is that really Open Science? Am I indeed personally and actively included in the dissemination of this research output? Can I use this in my own work and share those results with others?"

Making this series was actually harder than I imagined. The misuse turns out to have some common patterns and I quickly ran into the notion that an earlier tweet already covered the essence. Anyone, please enjoy the tweets. You can jump to the opening tweet or use this conveniently unrolled thread by Thread Reader App.

No comments:

Post a Comment