References
- ALLEA (2022) Aligning intellectual property rights with Open Science – ALLEA Statement. Available at:
https://allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/ALLEA-Statement-Aligning-IPR-with-Open-Science.pdf . - ALLEA (2023) The European code of conduct for research integrity – Revised edition 2023. Berlin. Available at:
https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/ . - Arthur, P.L. et al. (2021) ‘Open scholarship in Australia: A review of needs, barriers, and opportunities’, Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 36(4), pp. 795–812. Available at: 10.1093/llc/fqaa063
- ASAP (2021) ASAP’s Open Access policy. Available at:
https://parkinsonsroadmap.org/open-access-policy/# . - Blume, S.S. (1974) Toward a political sociology of science. New York: Free Press.
- BOAI (2002) Budapest Open Access Initiative Declaration. Available at:
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Bosman, J., Debackere, K. and Cawthorn, W. (2024) Next generation metrics for scientific and scholarly research in Europe (LERU position paper). Available at:
https://zenodo.org/records/11123148 . - Brown, C. et al. (2022) Research Data Alliance – National PID Strategies Working Group. Available at:
https://www.rd-alliance.org/groups/national-pid-strategies-wg/members/all-members/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Cabello Valdes, C. et al. (2017) EC DGRI Evaluation of research careers fully acknowledging Open Science practices – Rewards, incentives and/or recognition for researchers practising Open Science. EU Publications Office. Available at:
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/75255 (Accessed: 18 January 2024). - Carroll, S.R., Garba, I. et al. (2020) ‘The CARE Principles for Indigenous data governance’, Data Science Journal, 19(1), p.
43 . Available at: 10.5334/dsj-2020-043 - CLACSO (2019) FOLEC: Foro Latino Americano sobre evaluación científica. Available at:
https://www.clacso.org/folec/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - CNRS (2019) CNRS Roadmap for Open Science. Available at:
https://www.science-ouverte.cnrs.fr/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/CNRS_Roadmap_Open_Science_18nov2019.pdf (Accessed: 18 January 2024). - cOAlition S (2023) Plan S. towards responsible publishing. Available at: https://www.coalition-s.org/towards-responsible-publishing/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024).
- CoARA (2022) Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment. Available at:
https://coara.eu/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - CODATA WG (2024) CODATA Working Groups. Available at:
https://codata.org/initiatives/working-groups/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Cole, N.L. et al. (2024) The societal impact of Open Science–a scoping review. Available at:
https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/tqrwg . - CoNOSC Open Science Policies (2022) Available at:
https://conosc.org/os-policies/ (Accessed: 11 March 2025). - Czarnitzki, D., Grimpe, C. and Pellens, M. (2015) ‘Access to research inputs: open science versus the entrepreneurial university’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(6), pp. 1050–1063. Available at: 10.1007/s10961-015-9392-0
- Das, A.K. (2015) Research evaluation metrics. Paris: UNESCO. Available at:
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232210 . - Dasgupta, P. and David, P. (1994) ‘Toward a New Economics of Science’, Research Policy, 23(5), pp. 487–521. Available at: 10.1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1
- Datacite (2024) Data-level metrics. Available at:
https://datacite.org/blog/tag/data-level-metrics/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - David, R. et al. (2024) Templates for FAIRness evaluation criteria – RDA-SHARC ig V1.4. Available at:
https://zenodo.org/records/11243918 . - Dijstelbloem et al. (2013) Why science does not work as it should and what to do about it (Science in transition position paper). Available at:
https://scienceintransition.nl/app/uploads/2013/10/Science-in-Transition-Position-Paper-final.pdf . - DORA (2012) San Francisco declaration on research assessment. Available at:
https://sfdora.org/read/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - EC-DGRI (2022) European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation- European Research Area policy agenda – Overview of actions for the period 2022–2024. EU Publications Office. Available at:
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/52110 . - EC Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (2023) European IP Helpdesk Bulletin. No. 7, December 2023, Open science. Available at:
https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-law-and-publications/publication-detail/-/publication/943874e5-9fbc-11ee-b164-01aa75ed71a1 (Accessed: 29 May 2024). - EU AGA (2023) EU Funding Programmes 2021–2027. Annotated grant agreement. Available at:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/common/guidance/aga_en.pdf (Accessed: 18 January 2024). - EU Council (2022) Council Conclusions on Research Assessment and Implementation of Open Science, 10 June. Available at:
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/56958/st10126-en22.pdf (Accessed: 18 January 2024). - EU Horizon RIA GraspOS project (2023) EU – GraspOS: next Generation Research Assessment to Promote Open Science. Available at:
https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101095129 . - EU Parliament and Council (2021) Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013). Available at:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0695&qid=1705589817543 (Accessed: 18 January 2024). - Finke, A. and Hensel, T. (2024) Decentralized peer review in open science: A mechanism proposal. Available at: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.18148
- Gielen, S. et al. (2022) Open Science 2030 in the Netherlands. NPOS2030 Ambition Document and Rolling Agenda Version 1, December 7, 2022. Available at: 10.5281/zenodo.7433767
- Grattarola, F. et al. (2023a) Examples of awards/Prizes – RDA-SHARC IG recommendations. Available at:
https://bienflorencia.github.io/rda-sharc-reco/mapping_tools/os_award_prizes.html . - Grattarola, F. et al. (2023b) Examples of badges/certificates/tokens – RDA-SHARC IG recommendations. Available at:
https://bienflorencia.github.io/rda-sharc-reco/mapping_tools/os_badges_certificates_tokens.html . - Grattarola, F. et al. (2023c) Examples of champions – RDA-SHARC IG recommendations. Available at:
https://bienflorencia.github.io/rda-sharc-reco/mapping_tools/os_champions.html . - Grattarola, F. et al. (2023d) Examples of funds – RDA-SHARC IG recommendations. Available at:
https://bienflorencia.github.io/rda-sharc-reco/mapping_tools/os_funds.html . - Grattarola, F. et al. (2023e) Examples of national and institutional Open Science policies – RDA SHARC IG recommendations. Available at:
https://bienflorencia.github.io/rda-sharc-reco/mapping_tools/os_policies . - Grattarola, F. et al. (2023f) Terminology for RDA-SHARC IG recommendations. Available at:
https://bienflorencia.github.io/rda-sharc-reco/terminology.html . - Grattarola, F. et al. (2024) ‘Gaps between Open Science activities and actual recognition systems: Insights from an international survey’, PLoS ONE, 19(12), p.
e0315632 . 10.1371/journal.pone.0315632 - Haas, M.R. and Park, S. (2010) ‘To Share or Not to Share? Professional Norms, Reference Groups, and Information Withholding Among Life Scientists’, Organization Science, 21(4), pp. 873–891. Available at: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0500
- Hackett, E.J. (2008) Research Ethics. Science as a Vocation in the 1990s. The Changing Organizational Culture of Academic Science. Taylor & Francis. Available at:
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315244426-27/science-vocation-1990s-edward-hackett . - Haeussler, C. et al. (2014) ‘Specific and general information sharing among competing academic researchers’, Research Policy, 43(3), pp. 465–475. Available at: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.017
- Hicks, D. (2012) ‘Performance-based university research funding systems’, Research Policy, 41(2), pp. 251–261. Available at: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.007
- Hicks, D. et al. (2015) ‘The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics’, Nature, 520(7548), pp. 429–431. Available at: 10.1038/520429a
- Hill, C., Koellinger, P. and Van Winkle, E. (2024) Guest post – Navigating the drift: Persistence challenges in the digital scientific record and the promise of dPIDs. The Scholarly Kitchen. Available at:
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2024/03/14/guest-post-navigating-the-drift-persistence-challenges-in-the-digital-scientific-record-and-the-promise-of-dpids/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Kramer, B. and Bosman, J. (2024)
‘Recognition and rewards in academia – Recent trends in assessment’ , in M. Thunnissen and P. Boselie (eds.) Talent Management in Higher Education (Talent Management). Leeds: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 55–75. Available at: 10.1108/978-1-80262-685-820241004 - Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1986) Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Available at:
https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691028323/laboratory-life . - Manco, A. (2022) ‘A Landscape of Open Science Policies Research’, Sage Open, 12(4), p.
21582440221140358 . Available at: 10.1177/21582440221140358 - Matas, L. et al. (2023)
‘dARK: A decentralized blockchain implementation of ARK Persistent Identifiers. Open Repositories 2023 (OR2023), Stellenbosch, South Africa.’ , Zenodo. Available at: 10.5281/zenodo.8091668 - Merton, R.K. (1942) Science and Technology in a Democratic Order (The Normative Structure of Science). Storer N.W.
- Merton, R.K. (1973) The sociology of science. Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Available at:
https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3609203/1c-Merton-The-Normative-Structure-of-Science.pdf . - MHERI: French Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation (2021) Second French plan for Open Science. Generalising Open Science in France 2021–2024. French Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation. Available at:
https://www.ouvrirlascience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Second_French_Plan-for-Open-Science_web.pdf . - Moher, D. et al. (2020) ‘The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity’, PLoS Biol, 18(7), p.
e3000737 . Available at: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000737 - Mongeon, P. et al. (2017) ‘Incorporating data sharing to the reward system of science: Linking DataCite records to authors in the Web of Science’, Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69(5), pp. 545–556. Available at: 10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0024
- Munafò, M.R. et al. (2017) ‘A manifesto for reproducible science’, Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1), p.
0021 . Available at: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021 - Murray, F. and O’Mahony, S. (2007) ‘Exploring the foundations of cumulative innovation: Implications for organization science’, Organization Science, 18(6), pp. 1006–1021. Available at: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0325
- Nelson, A.J. (2016) ‘How to Share “A Really Good Secret”: Managing Sharing/Secrecy Tensions Around Scientific Knowledge Disclosure’, Organization Science, 27(2), pp. 265–285. Available at: 10.1287/orsc.2015.1040
- Nosek, B. (2024) Strategy for culture change. Center for Open Science. Available at:
https://www.cos.io/blog/strategy-for-culture-change (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Nuechterlein, A. et al. (2023) ‘Open science in play and in tension with patent protections’, Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 10(2), p.
lsad016 . Available at: 10.1093/jlb/lsad016 - Open and Universal Science (OPUS) project (2022) EU – Open and universal science (OPUS) project. Available at:
https://opusproject.eu/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Piwowar, H.A. and Chapman, W.W. (2008) ‘Identifying data sharing in biomedical literature’, AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, 2008, pp. 596–600. Available at: 10.1038/npre.2008.1721.1
- Portenoy, J. (2024) OurResearch receives $7.5M grant from Arcadia to establish OpenAlex, a milestone development for Open Science. OurResearch blog news from the OurResearch team. Available at:
https://blog.ourresearch.org/ourresearch-receives-7-5m-grant-from-arcadia-to-establish-openalex-a-milestone-development-for-open-science/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - RDA-EoR IG (2023) Research Data Alliance – Evaluation of Research Interest Group. Available at:
https://www.rd-alliance.org/groups/evaluation-research-ig/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - RDA-SHARC IG (2017) Research Data Alliance – SHAring Rewards & Credit (SHARC) Interest Group. Available at:
https://www.rd-alliance.org/groups/sharing-rewards-and-credit-sharc-ig (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Rijcke, S. et al. (2023) The future of research evaluation: The synthesis of current debates and development (IAP Discussion paper). Available at: 10.24948/2023.06
- Schneider, J. et al. (2022) ‘Do Open-Science badges increase trust in scientists among undergraduates, scientists, and the public?’, Psychol Sci, 33(9), pp. 1588–1604. Available at: 10.1177/09567976221097499
- Scilifelab Data Centre and ReSA (2024) 2024 International Research Software Funders Workshop. Available at:
https://adore.software/2024-international-research-software-funders-workshop/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Second World Conference on Research Integrity (2010) Singapore statement on research integrity. Available at:
https://www.singaporestatement.org/guidance/singapore-statement (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Shibayama, S. and Baba, Y. (2011) ‘Sharing research tools in academia: the case of Japan’, Science and Public Policy, 38(8), pp. 649–659. Available at: 10.3152/030234211X13122939587699
- Shibayama, S. and Lawson, C. (2021) ‘The use of rewards in the sharing of research resources’, Research Policy, 50(7), p.
104260 . Available at: 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104260 - Stall, S. et al. (2023) ‘Digital presence checklist’. Available at: 10.5281/zenodo.4706118
- Sveinsdottir, T., Davidson, J. and Proudman, V. (2021) An analysis of Open Science Policies in Europe. SPARC Europe. Available at: 10.5281/zenodo.4725817 (Accessed: 1 October 2024).
- Tenopir, C. et al. (2015) ‘Changes in data sharing and data reuse practices and perceptions among scientists worldwide’, PLoS ONE, 10(8), p.
e0134826 . Available at: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134826 - Thelwall, M., Kousha, K. and Waltman, L. (2015) The metric tide. Literature review (Supplementary report I to the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management). Available at: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5066.3520
- Ugwu Okechukwu, P.C. et al. (2023) ‘Redefining academic performance metrics: Evaluating the excellence of researchers, academics, and scholars’, Newport International Journal of Scientific and Experimental Sciences, 4(1), pp. 36–42. Available at: 10.59298/NIJSES/2023/10.5.1000
- UHR Working group (2021) NOR-CAM – A toolbox for recognition and rewards in academic careers. Available at:
https://www.uhr.no/en/_f/p3/i86e9ec84-3b3d-48ce-8167-bbae0f507ce8/nor-cam-a-tool-box-for-assessment-and-rewards.pdf . - UNESCO (2017) UNESCO Recommendation on science and scientific researchers. Available at:
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000263618 . - UNESCO (2021) UNESCO recommendation on Open Science. Available at: 10.54677/MNMH8546
- UNESCO (2023) UNESCO Open science outlook 1: Status and trends around the world. Paris: UNESCO. Available at: 10.54677/GIIC6829
- VNSU et al. (2019) Recognition and rewards. Room for everyone’s talent. Available at:
https://recognitionrewards.nl/about/position-paper/ (Accessed: 1 October 2024). - Wallis, J.C., Rolando, E. and Borgman, C.L. (2013) ‘If we share data, Will anyone use them? Data sharing and reuse in the long tail of science and technology’, PLoS ONE, 8(7), p.
e67332 . Available at: 10.1371/journal.pone.0067332 - Walsh, J.P., Cohen, W.M. and Cho, C. (2007) ‘Where excludability matters: Material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research’, Research Policy, 36(8), pp. 1184–1203. Available at: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.04.006
- Wilkinson, M.D. et al. (2016) ‘The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship’, Scientific Data, 3(1), p.
160018 . Available at: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18 - Wilsdon, J. et al. (2015) The metric tide – Report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Available at:
https://sk.sagepub.com/books/the-metric-tide . - Working group for responsible evaluation of a researcher (2020) Good practice in researcher evaluation. recommendation for the responsible evaluation of a researcher in Finland (Responsible research series 7:2020). Helsinki: The Committee for Public Information (TJNK) and Federation of Finnish Learned Societies (TSV). Available at:
https://avointiede.fi/sites/default/files/2020-03/responsible-evalution.pdf .