open science & altmetrics

Open Science & AltmetricsProfessor Dr. Isabella Peters, Web Science

MOTIVATION

Motivation I:

Social media & the Web are all over the place

Source: http://www.domo.com/learn/data-never-sleeps-2

Allgemeine und berufliche

Nutzung von Online-Toolsn

use in

scientific

workflows

metrics &

information

gathering

just

profile,

no use

Van N

oord

en,

R.

(2014).

Scie

ntists

and

the

socia

lnetw

ork

. N

atu

re,

512,

126–129.

doi:10.1

038/5

12126a

Motivation II:

Social media in

scholarly

communication

https://101innovations.wordpress.com/

Motivation II:

Social media in scholarly communication

OPEN SCIENCE

Drivers:

Open science push

Carlos MoedasCommissioner for Research, Science &

Innovation

„:the way that science works is

fundamentally changing and an equally

important transformation is taking place in

how companies and societies innovate. Put

simply, the advent of digital technologies is

making science and innovation more open,

collaborative, and global.“

• Mai 2016

• Directorate-General for Research &

Innovation

• DOI: 10.2777/061652

Open science in the EU

Video: https://www.leibniz-

science20.de/de/die-european-open-

science-cloud-in-den-digitalen-medien/

Open science in the EU

High Level Expert Group on the European Open Science Cloud:

metaphor to help convey both

seamlessness and the idea of a

commons based on scientific data

https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/realising_the_european_open_science_cloud_2016.pdf

2. Analysis, discussion

in blogs, wikis1. Publication of

gene sequence

3. Scientific publication

EHEC

Escherichia

coli bacterium

Open science: Examples & success stories

http://punkish.org/

A-lawyer-a-

scientist-and-a-kid

https://github.com/leereilly/swot


• Early feedback

https://www.icahdq.org/pubs/calls/Jour

nalOfMedia.asp


• Early feedback

http://riojournal.com/

EC, 2016, DOI: 10.2777/061652

Open science: Definitions

• Open Science opens up the

entire research enterprise

(inner circle) by using a variety

of means and digital tools

(outer circle)

• From publishing as fast as

possible to sharing as fast as

possible

Open science: Definition

The Open Definition (http://opendefinition.org)

• Relates to open source software

• Knowledge is open if anyone is free to access, use, modify, and

share it — subject, at most, to measures that preserve provenance and

openness.

Benefits of open science

• Science system vs.

individual researcher

• Quality

• Efficiency

• Reproducibility

• Credibility

• Visibility

http://whyopenresearch.orgEC, 2016, DOI: 10.2777/061652

Benefits of (online) open science: Visibility

Beel, J., Gipp, B., & Wilde, E. (2010). Academic Search

Engine Optimization (ASEO): Optimizing Scholarly Literature

for Google Scholar and Co. Journal of Scholarly Publishing,

41(2), 176–190. doi: 10.3138/jsp.41.2.176


http://de.slideshare.net/growkudos/authors-

use-of-social-media


Swan, A. (2010). The Open Access citation

advantage: Studies and results to date (Technical

Report). URL:

http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/268516

Benefits of open science: paradigm shift

Risks (?) of open science

• Blogging is a waste of precious time that could be spent on “legitimate”

publishing

• Because it’s a form of self-publishing that lacks peer review, blogging

isn’t usually viewed as a legitimate form of scholarship

• Dismissal of my work because it’s online [and] criticisms that my work

isn’t good enough to be published anywhere else.

• Sometimes blogging is even seen as disseminating one’s ideas too

freely. In a competitive academic field, research ideas could be

“scooped” from a blog, while established journals may not want to

publish work that’s available in some form online.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2011/11/3

0/should-you-enter-the-academic-blogosphere/

ALTMETRICS

Doom of metrics: Academia fights back

San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment (http://am.ascb.org/dora)

• “The declaration intends to halt the practice of correlating the

journal impact factor to the merits of a specific scientist's

contributions. [:] this practice creates biases and inaccuracies

when appraising scientific research. [:] the impact factor is not

to be used as a substitute ‘measure of the quality of individual

research articles, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions’”

Altmetrics Manifesto (http://altmetrics.org/manifesto)

• “Altmetrics expand our view of what impact looks like, but also of

what’s making the impact. [:] Unlike citation metrics, altmetrics

will track impact outside the academy, impact of influential but

uncited work, and impact from sources that aren’t peer-reviewed.

[:] The speed of altmetrics presents the opportunity to create

real-time recommendation and collaborative filtering systems”

Altmetrics in open science

Altmetrics in open science

The call for open metrics

• research products and data sources for metric development need

to be logically selected, open documented, and chosen in line with

the disciplinary norms;

• data that underlies metrics, indicators, and measurements need to

be open and accessible (preferably via automatic processes, e.g.

API);

• provision of software that was used for calculations;

• logical, scientific, and documented explanation of how data were

derived and metrics calculated.

Herb, U. (2016). Impactmessung, Transparenz

& Open Science: Open Metrics. Online:

https://www.scinoptica.com/2016/09/impactme

ssung-transparenz-open-science/

CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions

Conclusions

Science of open science

Conclusion

Open science is science

http://imgur.com/74I7MBx?r

science

qualityopen

Seite 32

Conclusions

http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachel-cleetus/you-cant-delete-climate-change

Professor Dr. Isabella Peters

ZBW – Leibniz Information Center for

Economics & Kiel University

[email protected]

Thank you!

• Gillet, D., El Helou, S., Joubert, M., & Sutherland, R. (2009). Science

2.0: Supporting a Doctoral Community of Practice in Technology

Enhanced Learning using Social Software. In Science2.0 for TEL,

Workshop at the 4th European Conference on Technology-Enhanced

Learning (ECTEL’09), Nice, France.

• Shneiderman, B. (2008). COMPUTER SCIENCE: Science 2.0. Science,

319(5868), 1349-1350. doi: 10.1126/science.1153539

• Underwood, J., Luckin, R., Smith, H., Walker, K., Rowland, D.,

Fitzpatrick, G., Good, J., Benford, S. (2009): Reflections on Participatory

Science for TELSci2.0, In: Science2.0 for TEL, Workshop at the 4th

European Conference on Technology-Enhanced Learning (ECTEL’09),

Nice, France.

• Waldrop, M. M. (2008). Science 2.0. Scientific American, 298(5), 68.

References