The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2024 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Novation |
Texto Completo: | https://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/article/view/95876 |
Resumo: | Von Schomberg offers a compelling examination of key open science principles and their potential role in fostering responsible research and innovation (RRI). Utilizing Merton's Ethos of Science framework, the paper constructs a series of arguments supporting a central thesis: “the transition towards open science is vital to facilitate RRI.” This transition necessitates significant institutional reforms within the scientific community and adjustments to incentive structures that promote the adoption of open and mutually responsive practices.The manuscript reframes the discourse surrounding responsibility and responsiveness in light of the evolving landscape of open science, shifting the focus from normative commitments to actionable frameworks in research and open science practices. Overall, the position paper strives to bridge the gap between idealised models of scientific communities based on RRI principles and the reality of actual scientific endeavour (Anderson et al., 2007; Politi, 2021, 2024).However, it is important to acknowledge certain omissions that could enrich the analysis. Firstly, a more comprehensive examination of the profound crisis facing science amidst the increasing marketisation and commodification of academia and research would provide valuable context beyond discussions of system failures related to productivity and reproducibility. Secondly, a more nuanced and critical approach to conceptualising open science would enrich the discussion, considering its multifaceted nature and potential pitfalls. Thirdly, the validity of the Mertonian framework and its selective analysis of values, particularly its exclusive focus on the norm of communism. Lastly, a deeper exploration of the challenges and promises inherent in the pursuit of responsible Open Science within ongoing institutional processes. |
id |
UFPR-18_01479b4d8f73e703a4312fe42e0e5f69 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.ufpr.br:article/95876 |
network_acronym_str |
UFPR-18 |
network_name_str |
Novation |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough?open science; Robert K. Merton; Covid 19, research values; scientific integrity; research assessmentVon Schomberg offers a compelling examination of key open science principles and their potential role in fostering responsible research and innovation (RRI). Utilizing Merton's Ethos of Science framework, the paper constructs a series of arguments supporting a central thesis: “the transition towards open science is vital to facilitate RRI.” This transition necessitates significant institutional reforms within the scientific community and adjustments to incentive structures that promote the adoption of open and mutually responsive practices.The manuscript reframes the discourse surrounding responsibility and responsiveness in light of the evolving landscape of open science, shifting the focus from normative commitments to actionable frameworks in research and open science practices. Overall, the position paper strives to bridge the gap between idealised models of scientific communities based on RRI principles and the reality of actual scientific endeavour (Anderson et al., 2007; Politi, 2021, 2024).However, it is important to acknowledge certain omissions that could enrich the analysis. Firstly, a more comprehensive examination of the profound crisis facing science amidst the increasing marketisation and commodification of academia and research would provide valuable context beyond discussions of system failures related to productivity and reproducibility. Secondly, a more nuanced and critical approach to conceptualising open science would enrich the discussion, considering its multifaceted nature and potential pitfalls. Thirdly, the validity of the Mertonian framework and its selective analysis of values, particularly its exclusive focus on the norm of communism. Lastly, a deeper exploration of the challenges and promises inherent in the pursuit of responsible Open Science within ongoing institutional processes.Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba (Brazil)Edwards-Schachter, Mónica2024-06-25info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo de convidadoGuest Authorapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/article/view/9587610.5380/nocsi.v0i6.95876NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation; No 6 (2024): Towards a New Ethos of Science or a Reform of the Institution of Science?; 43-61NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation; No 6 (2024): Towards a New Ethos of Science or a Reform of the Institution of Science?; 43-612562-714710.5380/nocsi.v0i6reponame:Novationinstname:Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)instacron:UFPRenghttps://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/article/view/95876/52179Copyright (c) 2024 Mónica Edwards-Schachterhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-07-01T11:50:34Zoai:revistas.ufpr.br:article/95876Revistahttps://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/indexPUBhttps://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/oainovation@ufpr.br2562-71472562-7147opendoar:2024-07-01T12:57:13.302932Novation - Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
title |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
spellingShingle |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? Edwards-Schachter, Mónica open science; Robert K. Merton; Covid 19, research values; scientific integrity; research assessment |
title_short |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
title_full |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
title_fullStr |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
title_full_unstemmed |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
title_sort |
The Promises of Responsible Open Science: Is Institutionalization of Openness and Mutual Responsiveness Enough? |
author |
Edwards-Schachter, Mónica |
author_facet |
Edwards-Schachter, Mónica |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Edwards-Schachter, Mónica |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
open science; Robert K. Merton; Covid 19, research values; scientific integrity; research assessment |
topic |
open science; Robert K. Merton; Covid 19, research values; scientific integrity; research assessment |
description |
Von Schomberg offers a compelling examination of key open science principles and their potential role in fostering responsible research and innovation (RRI). Utilizing Merton's Ethos of Science framework, the paper constructs a series of arguments supporting a central thesis: “the transition towards open science is vital to facilitate RRI.” This transition necessitates significant institutional reforms within the scientific community and adjustments to incentive structures that promote the adoption of open and mutually responsive practices.The manuscript reframes the discourse surrounding responsibility and responsiveness in light of the evolving landscape of open science, shifting the focus from normative commitments to actionable frameworks in research and open science practices. Overall, the position paper strives to bridge the gap between idealised models of scientific communities based on RRI principles and the reality of actual scientific endeavour (Anderson et al., 2007; Politi, 2021, 2024).However, it is important to acknowledge certain omissions that could enrich the analysis. Firstly, a more comprehensive examination of the profound crisis facing science amidst the increasing marketisation and commodification of academia and research would provide valuable context beyond discussions of system failures related to productivity and reproducibility. Secondly, a more nuanced and critical approach to conceptualising open science would enrich the discussion, considering its multifaceted nature and potential pitfalls. Thirdly, the validity of the Mertonian framework and its selective analysis of values, particularly its exclusive focus on the norm of communism. Lastly, a deeper exploration of the challenges and promises inherent in the pursuit of responsible Open Science within ongoing institutional processes. |
publishDate |
2024 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2024-06-25 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artigo de convidado Guest Author |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/article/view/95876 10.5380/nocsi.v0i6.95876 |
url |
https://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/article/view/95876 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5380/nocsi.v0i6.95876 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ufpr.br/novation/article/view/95876/52179 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2024 Mónica Edwards-Schachter http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2024 Mónica Edwards-Schachter http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba (Brazil) |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba (Brazil) |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation; No 6 (2024): Towards a New Ethos of Science or a Reform of the Institution of Science?; 43-61 NOvation - Critical Studies of Innovation; No 6 (2024): Towards a New Ethos of Science or a Reform of the Institution of Science?; 43-61 2562-7147 10.5380/nocsi.v0i6 reponame:Novation instname:Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR) instacron:UFPR |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR) |
instacron_str |
UFPR |
institution |
UFPR |
reponame_str |
Novation |
collection |
Novation |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Novation - Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
novation@ufpr.br |
_version_ |
1808579137635352576 |