• Policy Recommendations

    Five recommendations to open up science

  • OpenUP Logo Mockup

    Opening UP the research lifecycle

  • Library S 1666702 640
    Are you a researcher at an early stage?
    Find out tips and tricks on where to start

  • Final conference
    OpenUP final conference report - Day 1
    ‘Opening Up the Research Life Cycle: Innovative Methods for Open Science’

  • Header OpenScience 700x320

    Explore Responsible Research & Innovation

Review
Assess
Disseminate

OpenUP hub

OpenUP Hub is an open, dynamic and collaborative knowledge environment that systematically captures, organizes and categorizes research outcomes, best practices, tools and guidelines. Explore the given material about opening up the review-dissemination-assessment phases of the research lifecycle and practices to support the transition to a more open and gender sensitive research environment.
 

I am a...

Young Scholar

Young Scholar

and I want to understand alternative reviewing methods
Researcher

Researcher

and I seek for novel ways to disseminate my work
Project manager

Project manager

and I am interested in analyzing the impact of a scientific work and correlate them to dissemination channels
Funder

Funder

and I want to sense the community pulse to better stream the funding
Policy maker

Policy maker

and I want to listen to the needs of the scientific community
Open Science advocate

Open Science advocate

and I want to advance Open Science
Publisher

Publisher

and I want to identify emerging ideas and researchers to publish their work
Librarian

Librarian

and I want to learn more about Altmetrics
 


Community - Read, write & connect!

OpenUP Hub is the meeting point where new ideas and beliefs are expressed.

 

Blog

Blog

Are you an Open Science advocate? Join the community and share your ideas!
Calendar

Calendar

Find the events that interest you.
Observatory

Observatory

Sense the community pulse!
Members

Members

Meet & connect with other community members!
OpenScience Q&A

OpenScience Q&A

Have a question on Open Science? Join the Ask Open Science forum.

  

>

Gender

Gender is one of the key components of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) as well as the European Commission’s overall approach to promoting a culture of openly sharing information among researchers, innovative industries and citizens.

 

 

open access Scientific publishing

Authors

Cenyu ShenEmail, Bo-Christer Björk

Short Description

A negative consequence of the rapid growth of scholarly open access publishing funded by article processing charges is the emergence of publishers and journals with highly questionable marketing and peer review practices. These so-called predatory publishers are causing unfounded negative publicity for open access publishing in general. Reports about this branch of e-business have so far mainly concentrated on exposing lacking peer review and scandals involving publishers and journals. There is a lack of comprehensive studies about several aspects of this phenomenon, including extent and regional distribution. After an initial scan of all predatory publishers and journals included in the so-called Beall’s list, a sample of 613 journals was constructed using a stratified sampling method from the total of over 11,000 journals identified. Information about the subject field, country of publisher, article processing charge and article volumes published between 2010 and 2014 were manually collected from the journal websites. For a subset of journals, individual articles were sampled in order to study the country affiliation of authors and the publication delays.

Access

Gold

Reference

Shen, C., & Björk, B. C. (2015). ‘Predatory’open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC medicine, 13(1), 230.

DOI

10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2

Link

https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2

open science FAIR data

Authors

Mark D. Wilkinson, Michel Dumontier, IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg, Gabrielle Appleton, Myles Axton, Arie Baak, Niklas Blomberg, Jan-Willem Boiten, Luiz Bonino da Silva Santos, Philip E. Bourne, Jildau Bouwman, Anthony J. Brookes, Tim Clark, Mercè Crosas, Ingrid Dillo, Olivier Dumon, Scott Edmunds, Chris T. Evelo, Richard Finkers, Alejandra Gonzalez-Beltran, Alasdair J.G. Gray, Paul Groth, Carole Goble, Jeffrey S. Grethe, Jaap Heringa, Peter A.C ’t Hoen, Rob Hooft, Tobias Kuhn, Ruben Kok, Joost Kok, Scott J. Lusher, Maryann E. Martone, Albert Mons, Abel L. Packer, Bengt Persson, Philippe Rocca-Serra, Marco Roos, Rene van Schaik, Susanna-Assunta Sansone, Erik Schultes, Thierry Sengstag, Ted Slater, George Strawn, Morris A. Swertz, Mark Thompson, Johan van der Lei, Erik van Mulligen, Jan Velterop, Andra Waagmeester, Peter Wittenburg, Katherine Wolstencroft, Jun Zhao & Barend Mons

Short Description

There is an urgent need to improve the infrastructure supporting the reuse of scholarly data. A diverse set of stakeholders—representing academia, industry, funding agencies, and scholarly publishers—have come together to design and jointly endorse a concise and measurable set of principles that we refer to as the FAIR Data Principles. The intent is that these may act as a guideline for those wishing to enhance the reusability of their data holdings. Distinct from peer initiatives that focus on the human scholar, the FAIR Principles put specific emphasis on enhancing the ability of machines to automatically find and use the data, in addition to supporting its reuse by individuals. This Comment is the first formal publication of the FAIR Principles and includes the rationale behind them and some exemplary implementations in the community.

Access

Gold

Reference

Wilkinson, M. D. et al. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3.

DOI

doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18

Link

https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618

Unless otherwise indicated, content hosted on OpenUP Hub is licensed under an Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).