The pandemic has brought opportunities for greater inclusion in science : a thematic analysis of documents on open science practices

• Autor(a) principal: Oliveira, Monique Batista de
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: Barata, Germana Fernandes, Hafiz , Mariana, Marshall, Melanie Benson, Pinfield, Stephen
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por; eng
• Título da fonte: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rdbci/article/view/8673918
• topic: Open access; Open science; Pandemics; Covid-19; Acesso aberto; Acesso à informação; Pandemia; Covid-19

Introduction: The response to the Covid-19 pandemic caused the expansion of the volume of scientific data and the encouragement of Open Science (OS) practices as scientists share their data in attempts to control the global public health emergency. As a result, opportunities for OS have also expanded during the pandemic. Objective: The herein study aimed to map shared narratives about OS practices during the pandemic paying particular attention to debates on public access to knowledge and practices and values of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI). Methodology: We have conducted a thematic and documental analysis of 30 journal articles, news pieces, blog posts and institutional material published in Portuguese obtained via key-word searches on SciELO, Google, Chamber of Deputies and the Senate databases. Results: Data shows that 36.6% (11) of the documents mentioned EDI while 70% (21) included discussions on public and universal access to scientific knowledge. As the documents could mention both themes, they were coded in both categories as needed. In addition, 23% (7) of the sample did not mention any of these categories while 77% presented discussions on at least one of them. Conclusion: Open Science practices were associated with the need of a rapid response to the pandemic leading to questions on whether these practices will endure following the absence of such urgency. Regardless of being in its preliminary state, the EDI debate pointed to opportunities for co-production of knowledge and the need for more inclusive practices, including live public debates on evidence production.