Which aspects of the Open Science agenda are most relevant to scientometric research and publishing? An opinion paper-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Which aspects of the Open Science agenda are most relevant to scientometric research and publishing? An opinion paper

Published:2021 Issue:2 Volume:2 Page:438-453
ISSN:2641-3337
Container-title:Quantitative Science Studies
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Bornmann Lutz¹^ORCID,Guns Raf²^ORCID,Thelwall Michael³^ORCID,Wolfram Dietmar⁴^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Science Policy and Strategy Department, Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society, Hofgartenstr. 8, 80539 Munich, Germany

2. Centre for R&D Monitoring, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Antwerp, Middelheimlaan 1, 2020 Antwerpen, Belgium

3. Statistical Cybermetrics Research Group, School of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Wolverhampton Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, UK

4. School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI, USA, 53201

Abstract

Abstract Open Science is an umbrella term that encompasses many recommendations for possible changes in research practices, management, and publishing with the objective to increase transparency and accessibility. This has become an important science policy issue that all disciplines should consider. Many Open Science recommendations may be valuable for the further development of research and publishing, but not all are relevant to all fields. This opinion paper considers the aspects of Open Science that are most relevant for scientometricians, discussing how they can be usefully applied.

Publisher

MIT Press - Journals

Subject

Aerospace Engineering

Link

http://direct.mit.edu/qss/article-pdf/2/2/438/1930758/qss_e_00121.pdf

Reference68 articles.

1. Why scientists must share their research code;Baker;Nature,2016

2. Writing a reproducible paper in R markdown (SSRN scholarly paper no. ID 3175518);Bauer,2018

3. Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?;Bornmann;Scientometrics,2005

4. A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposals: Different ways of comparing rejected to awarded applications;Bornmann;Journal of Informetrics,2010

5. From black box to white box at open access journals: Predictive validity of manuscript reviewing and editorial decisions at Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics;Bornmann;Research Evaluation,2010

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture;F1000Research;2024-07-09

2. A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture;F1000Research;2024-04-23

3. A guide for social science journal editors on easing into open science;Research Integrity and Peer Review;2024-02-16

4. Operationalizing open and restricted-access data—Formulating verifiable criteria for the openness of data sets mentioned in biomedical research articles;Quantitative Science Studies;2024

5. Mapping Smart Materials’ Literature: An Insight between 1990 and 2022;Sustainability;2023-10-23