Open Science

M1 Research Data Management M2 Visibility of the activity and networking Orientation module M4 Advice and technical support M3 CAS in DATA STEWARDSHIP OPEN SCIENCE Introduction and Contextualization of Research Data Management Practices Prof. Georg Lutz, Director FORS 2 ABOUT THIS PRESENTATION This presentation is released under a CC-BY 4.0 license, which means that you are free to reuse, distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, we highly recommend to license the modified material under identical terms. This course is part of the CAS in Data Stewardship. Author Prof Georg Lutz Provider FORS Title Open Science Education level Graduates Language English License CC-BY 4.0 Estimate total time 3.5h (with interactions) Version v20241002 How to attribute LUTZ, Georg, 2024. Open Science [Lausanne]. CAS Data Stewardship UNIL. 10 October 2024. 3 YOUR HOST Prof. Georg Lutz Director FORS Professor of Political Sciences, University of Lausanne My background •Studies of political science and history in Bern, Geneva •PhD in Bern and Trinity College Dublin •Project leader Swiss Election Study (Selects) 2008-2016 at FORS •Director of FORS since 2016 •Member of various governance bodies related to surveys, research infrastructures and ORD What is FORS? •A national ”infrastructure of infrastructures” in the social sciences •Longitudinal surveys (national surveys such as Swiss Household Panel, Selects, MOSAiCH; Swiss part of international surveys: ESS, ISSP, CSES, CCS) •Host of national and international collaborative projects •Data management and archival services for the social sciences •Partner in SWISSUbase and mandated with running the platform and services •Research 4 PEDAGOGICAL OBJECTIVES In this lesson we will work on these professional skills: •Understand the functioning and challenges of the research process in an institutional context, including policies, organization and strategy (PS1) •Be familiar with research-related professions and their interaction within an institution (PS1) •Understand the challenges of Open Science and Open Research Data and what they mean for research data management (PS8) 5 LESSON PLAN 1. Introduction (20’) 2. Pros, Cons and obstacles of Open Science and ORD: group discussion followed by short presentation per group (50’) 3. Open Science and ORD: international perspective (20’) Break (20’) 4. The national ORD landscape (30’) 5. Where is your institution with respect to ORD policies and where should it go: individual work and presentation (50’) 6. Conclusion, final discussion (20’) Estimate total time (including break) = 210 minutes 6 Image created using DALL·E by OpenAI. 7 PRO, CONS AND OBSTACLES OF OPEN SCIENCE AND ORD Group discussion followed by short presentation per group Group discussion: Based on your knowledge and preparation work, discuss within the group the following aspects (30‘): •Key drivers and reasons for Open science and ORD (green post-it) •Key barriers and challenges Open science and ORD (red post-it) •Ideas how to best overcome the barriers (yellow post-it) One person per group will present the result of the discussion in the group (20‘) Time: 30’ + 20’ INSTRUCTIONS 8 9 OPEN SCIENCE AND ORD: INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE Some fundamental common definitions and small history regarding OS and ORD “This meta-analysis provides an updated meta-analysis that calculates the pooled estimates of research misconduct (RM) and questionable research practices (QRPs), and explores the factors associated with the prevalence of these issues. The estimates, committing RM concern at least 1 of FFP (falsification, fabrication, plagiarism) and (unspecified) QRPs concern 1 or more QRPs, were 2.9% (95% CI 2.1– 3.8%) and 12.5% (95% CI 10.5–14.7%), respectively. In addition, 15.5% (95% CI 12.4– 19.2%) of researchers witnessed others who had committed at least 1 RM, while 39.7% (95% CI 35.6–44.0%) were aware of others who had used at least 1 QRP.” Source: Xie, Y., Wang, K. & Kong, Y. (2021). Prevalence of Research Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. (Access) Questionable research practices (QRP) = issues related to the “protection of human subjects, in the welfare of laboratory animals, in relation to conflicts of interest, in data management practices, in mentor and trainee responsibilities, in collaborative research, in authorship and publication, and in peer reviews.” THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM 16 •Open Science Collaboration (2015): One of the most influential studies on the reproducibility crisis is a large-scale replication effort called the "Reproducibility Project" led by the Open Science Collaboration in 2015. In this project, researchers attempted to replicate 100 studies from prominent psychology journals. They found that only 36% of the replications produced statistically significant results, compared to 97% of the original studies. •Source: Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349 (6251). THE REPLICATION CRISIS IN PSYCHOLOGY 17 18 THE MEANING OF REPRODUCIBILITY `Old’ definition: replication in the wide sense •Getting similar results using same or different data, different methods, ... •Requirement: decent description of data sources & methods used `New’ definition: replication in the narrow sense •Getting the exact same tables, figures, etc. as the original publication using the same data. •Requirement: availability of (replication) data, codes, software, metadata etc. •Emerging terminology: «computational reproducibility» •Data are not available •Data available but not usable because documentation is lacking •Data available, but code is not •Data and code are available, but there are •data problems, •numerical problems, •software problems, •. . . WHY ARE SOME PUBLICATIONS NOT REPRODUCIBLE? 19 •The FAIR principles (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) were first formally introduced in a paper published in 2016 titled "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship" in Scientific Data. The concept was developed by a consortium of stakeholders from academia, industry, funding agencies, and scholarly publishers, who recognized the need for a standardized framework to ensure data is reusable in the long term. (Original article: https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618.pdf). •The key motivation behind FAIR was to address issues related to data fragmentation and nonstandardized data sharing practices. At the time, researchers frequently kept data in silos or used inconsistent formats, making it difficult for others to find, access, or reuse the data. -> FAIR become very rapidly the standard of ORD practices (more in the next module on Friday). See for an overview on the history of the FAIR principles: Carballo-Garcia, A., & Boté-Vericad, J.-J. (2022, Mai 25). FAIR Data: history and present context. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6483686 THE FAIR FRAMEWORK: SHORT HISTORY AND IMPACT 20 WHAT IS NEEDED TO MAKE OPEN SCIENCE A REALITY? 21 Open Science and ORD Recognition in research assessment Platforms, interconnected Services and Support Standards Policies Funding •EU policies: Commission recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific information (from 2012, renewed 2018): •https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/ourdigital-future/open-science_en •https://rea.ec.europa.eu/open-science_en •Horizon requirements on open data and DMPs: https://rea.ec.europa.eu/index_en •European Open Science Cloud EOSC: https://eosc.eu •ESFRI (https://www.esfri.eu/) and the ERICs (European Research Infrastructure Consortium) •Cluster projects https://science-clusters.eu/ (like SSHOC https://sshopencloud.eu/) •University organisation like LERU: https://www.leru.org/files/LERU-Statement-onOpen-Research-Data-Full-paper.pdf INTERNATIONAL POLICIES AND ACTORS 22 23 THE NATIONAL ORD LANDSCAPE WHO IS WHO IN OPEN SCIENCE IN SWITZERLAND? 24 SAGW: Funding of Editions (and others), SAMW: SPHN Policy and Funding: Research Infrastructures like FORS, SIB, longitudinal studies & cohorts National ERIC nodes: CESSDA; DARIAH, CLARIN, ELIXIR etc. ERICs (European Research Infrastructure Consortia) Delegation open science (Delos) Policy and project funding Policy and funding •Funds swissuniversities, the national science foundation, academies, higher education. •Involved in some policy decision (Open Access strategy, ORD strategy and action plan, EOSC policy), Mandates the ORD strategy council. •Organizes the national roadmap process for research infrastructures. Further information: •https://www.sbfi.admin.ch/sbfi/de/home/hs/hochschulen/hochschulpolitisc he-themen/open-science.html THE ROLE OF THE STATE SECRETARIAT FOR EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND INNOVATION (SERI) 25 •“Health and Life Sciences Data Cluster Analysis” (Landscape analysis on health and life sciences produced by the respective task force) •“Research Data Infrastructures: a distinct characteristic in research infrastructures” (Concept paper on research infrastructures) •In the making: •“Social Sciences and Humanities Cluster Analysis” (to be published end of 2024/early 2025) •“Enhancing Open Research Data in Switzerland. Analysis and recommendations from the ORD Sounding Board of Service Providers” (to be published end of 2024/early 2025) •To follow: “Data science cluster analysis”, in 2025. KEY OUTPUTS OF THE StraCo SO FAR 32 •Incremental in pushing open science in Switzerland with various initiatives and policies (https://www.snf.ch/en/dMILj9t4LNk8NwyR/topic/openresearch-data). •Key ORD policy: “The SNSF therefore expects all its funded researchers •to store the research data they have worked on and produced during the course of their research work, •to share these data with other researchers, unless they are bound by legal, ethical, copyright, confidentiality or other clauses, and •to deposit their data and metadata onto existing public repositories in formats that anyone can find, access and reuse without restriction.” •Requires researchers to establish “Data Management Plans”, initially for all projects, since 2024 only for projects accepted for funding. SWISS NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 33 •Has an ORD unit responsible for coordinating the ORD •Factsheet on open science •Participates in StraCo, coordinates the StraCo “Sounding board of Researchers” Further information: •https://akademien-schweiz.ch/en/themen/scientific-culture/open-science/ •https://ord.akademien-schweiz.ch/en SWISS ACADEMIES OF ARTS AND SCIENCES 34 35 OTHERS INVOLVED IN POLICY MAKING And then you have different national initiatives and research infrastructures involved in many ways also in policy making… •FORS •DARIAH-CH and CLARINCH •SSHOC-CH (Social Sciences and Humanities Open Cluster Switzerland) •DaSCH •SIB •Connectome (switch) •Swiss Data Science Center (SDSC) •Swiss Personalised Health Network (SPHN) •Libraries •SWISSUBase •Different Universities •… •Open Science and ORD are accepted principles by all main national and international actors. •Also some key features recognized, e.g. that ORD requires more than just some policy principles: specialized institutions and infrastructures, support services. •„Sharing culture“ among researchers and also recognition of ORD in career assessments are lacking behind. •Implementation and concrete policies are still scattered. A lot of different actors, initiatives, policies. Complicated to understand also for insiders. •Move towards the ORD strategy Council as a central ORD policy coordinating institution, •…however funding goes through other channels. •Largely unresolved: sustainable funding and governance of the entire ORD landscape. SOME CONCLUSIONS 36 37 WHERE IS YOUR INSTITUTION WITH RESPECT TO ORD POLICIES AND WHERE SHOULD IT GO? Individual work followed by short presentation to the group Individual work: Based on your preparation work and this lesson: •Update your draft presentation (3 slides) on your institution ORD policy: •1 Slide: existing institutional ORD policies •1 Slide: existing support structures in your institutions •1 Slide: gaps and possible improvements •Present the key issues to the group (max. 3‘) Time: 20’ + 30’ (estimate) Info: Revised version needs to be handed in after the course INSTRUCTIONS 38 39 CONCLUSION, FINAL DISCUSSION •Submit your final presentation on Moodle after the course. NEXT STEPS 40 Sources on Open Access and ORD: For links to international actors: see slide 22 State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation https://www.sbfi.admin.ch/sbfi/de/home/hs/hochschulen/hochschulpolitisch e-themen/open-science.html swissuniversities https://www.swissuniversities.ch/themen/open-science/open-access https://www.swissuniversities.ch/en/topics/open-science/open-researchdata/national-strategy ORD Strategy Council https://openresearchdata.swiss/ swiss academies of arts and sciences https://akademien-schweiz.ch/en/themen/scientific-culture/open-science/ https://ord.akademien-schweiz.ch/en Swiss National Science Foundation https://oa100.snf.ch/en/home-en/ https://www.snf.ch/en/dMILj9t4LNk8NwyR/topic/open-research-data REFERENCES & SOURCES 41 References: Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences, Pfister Roger, Lauer Gerhard, Agosti Donat, Appenzeller Claudia, Girardclos Stéphanie, Hürlimann Daniel, Immenhauser Beat, Kasparian Jérôme, Lebrand Cécile, Schneider Gabi, & Yilmaz Aysim. (2019). Open Science in Switzerland: Opportunities and Challenges. In Swiss Academies Factsheets (Bd. 14, Nummer 2). Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3248929 Xie, Y., Wang, K., & Kong, Y. (2021). Prevalence of research misconduct and questionable research practices: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Science and engineering ethics, 27(4), 41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00314-9 Carballo-Garcia, A., & Boté-Vericad, J.-J. (2022). FAIR Data: history and present context. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6483686 Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., ... & Mons, B. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18