The scientific reward system from the perspective of Open Science
evaluation dimensions, characteristics and challenges
Keywords:
Altmetrics, Open science, Scientific communication, Reward system of scienceAbstract
This is a qualitative bibliographical research that aimed to discuss the Scientific Reward System based on its evaluation dimensions, characteristics and challenges in the light of Open Science. Its methodological process was based on the exploration of national and international databases, bibliometric procedures and content analysis of 42 works. The data demonstrated that the most significant dimension of the Open Science Reward System is Open Science Practices (92.8%) and Open Science Assessment Policies (71.4%). There was a lack of reference researchers on the topic, which has recently begun to gain notoriety in the scientific literature. Sharing research data and scientific reproducibility are the Open Science practices most receptive to by the scientific community and most recognized by the Scientific Reward System. As challenges, the need for more research based on metrics that support a reward system, studies that address the influence of social factors and phenomena in this system, as well as those that consider the reality of peripheral countries in the face of a system based on practices were identified of Open Science.
Downloads
References
Angere, S.; Olsson, E. J. Publish late, publish rarely! Network density and group performance in scientific communication. In: Scientific collaboration and collective knowledge. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. p. 34-62. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190680534.003.0001.
Antunes, C. A escola do trabalho: formação humana em Marx. Campinas: Papel Social, 2018.
Araujo, R. F. Ciência aberta e altmetria: aproximações e desafios. In: Moreira, L. A.; Souza, J. A.; Tanus, G. F. S. C. (org.). Informação na sociedade contemporânea. Florianópolis: Rocha Gráfica:Editora (Selo Nyota), 2020. p. 39-50.
Babini, D.; Rovelli, L. Tendencias recientes en las políticas científicas de ciencia abierta y acceso abierto en Iberoamérica. Buenos Aires: CLACSO, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1gm02tq.
Bausell, R. B. The problem with science: The reproducibility crisis and what to do about it. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2021.
Beigel, M. F. El proyecto de ciencia abierta en un mundo desigual. Relaciones Internacionales, n. 50, p. 163-181, 2022. Doi: https://doi.org/10.15366/relacionesinternacionales2022.50.008.
Borges, M. M. et al. Compartilhamento de dados de pesquisa em neurociências: a percepção luso-brasileira. Cadernos BAD (Portugual), n. 1, 2018. Disponível em: https://brapci.inf.br/#/v/109996. Acesso em: 8 jan. 2024.
Burgelman, J. C. et al. Open science, open data, and open scholarship: European policies to make science fit for the twenty-first century. Frontiers in Big Data, v. 2, p. 43, 2019. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2019.00043.
Carayol, N.; Dalle, J. M. Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, v. 18, n. 2, p. 167-191, 2007. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2006.05.001.
Carillo, M. R.; Papagni, E. Little Science” and “Big Science”: The institution of “Open Science” as a cause of scientific and economic inequalities among countries. Economic Modelling, v. 43, p. 42-56, 2014. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2014.06.021.
Dasgupta, P.; David, P. A. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, v. 23, n. 5, p. 487-521, 1994. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1.
Davies, S. W. et al. Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science. PLos Biology, v. 19, n. 6, e3001282, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001282.
Desrochers, N. et al. Authorship, patents, citations, acknowledgments, tweets, reader counts and the multifaceted reward system of science. In: Grove, A. (ed.). Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. St Louis: Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015. p. 1-4.
Devriendt, T.; Shabani, M.; Borry, P. Data sharing platforms and the academic evaluation system. EMBO Reports, v. 21, n. 8, e50690, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202050690.
Devriendt, T.; Shabani, M.; Borry, P. Data sharing in biomedical sciences: a systematic review of incentives. Biopreservation and Biobanking, v. 19, n. 3, p. 219-227, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2020.0037.
Devriendt, T.; Shabani, M.; Borry, P. Reward systems for cohort data sharing: An interview study with funding agencies. Plos One, v. 18, n. 3, e0282969, 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282969.
Díaz-Fragoso, O.; Riquelme-Alcantar, G. M. L.; Rivera-González, G. Compartir datos de investigación: reflexiones desde elethosde la ciencia de Robert K. Merton. Ciencia Ergo Sum, v. 29, n. 1, 2022. Doi: https://doi.org/10.30878/ces.v29n1a3.
Guanaes, P. C. V. Abertura e compartilhamento de dados de pesquisa subjacentes a artigos científicos: questões do direito autoral. 2020. 234 f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência da Informação) - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 2020.
Hayashi, M. C. P. I. Epígrafes no sistema de recompensas da ciência: notas teóricas e modelo de análise. RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, v. 20, e022004, 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.20396/rdbci.v20i00.8667926.
Hertwich, E. et al. Nullius in Verba 1: Advancing data transparency in industrial ecology. Journal of Industrial Ecology, v. 22, n. 1, p. 6-17, 2018. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12738.
Joly, Y. et al. Open science and community norms: data retention and publication moratoria policies in genomics projects. Medical Law International, v. 12, n. 2, p. 92-120, 2012. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533212458431.
Keener, S. K.; Kepes, S.; Torka, A. K. The trustworthiness of the cumulative knowledge in industrial/organizational psychology: The current state of affairs and a path forward. Acta Psychologica, v. 239, p. 104005, 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104005.
Koch, C.; Jones, A. Big science, team science, and open science for neuroscience. Neuron, v. 92, n. 3, p. 612-616, 2016. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.019.
Kouper, I.; Scheidt, L. A.; Plale, B. A. Fostering interdisciplinary data cultures through early career development: The RDA/US Data Share Fellowship. Data Science Journal, v. 20, n. 2, p. 1-19, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-002.
Leonelli, S. MLE on Open science: Altmetrics and rewards. Bruxelas: European Commission, 2017. Disponível em: https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/31348. Acesso em 27 dez. 2021.
Marconi, M. A.; Lakatos, E. M. Fundamentos de metodologia científica. 5. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2003.
Marshall, B. M.; Strine, C. T. Make like a glass frog: In support of increased transparency in herpetology. Herpetological Journal, v. 31, n. 1, p. 35-45, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.33256/31.1.3545.
Marx, K. Manuscritos econômico-filosóficos. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2004.
Marx, K. O capital: crítica da economia política. São Paulo: Boitempo: Livro I, 2013.
Merton, R. K. The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, v. 159, n. 3810, p. 56-63, 1968. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56.
Moher, D. COVID-19 and the research scholarship ecosystem: help! Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, v. 137, p. 133-136, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.032.
O’Carroll, C. et al. Evaluation of Research Careers fully acknowledging Open Science Practices-Rewards, incentives and/or recognition for researchers practicing Open Science. Luxemburgo: Publication Office of the Europen Union, Working Group on Rewards under Open Science, 2017. Disponível em: https://orbi.uliege.be/handle/2268/215460. Acesso em: 6 out. 2021.
Oliveira, A. S. Desvendando a autoralidade colaborativa na e-science sob a ótica dos direitos de propriedade intelectual. 2016. 300 f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência da Informação) - Universidade Federal da Paraíba, João Pessoa, 2016.
Paul-Hus, A. et al. The reward system of science. Aslib Journal of Information Management, v. 69, n. 5, p. 478-485, 2017. Disponível em: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AJIM-07-2017-0168/full/html. Acesso em: 12 jul. 2024.
Priem, J. et al. Altmetrics: a manifesto. [S. l. : s. n.], 2010. Disponível em: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto. Acesso em: 8 jan. 2024.
Quan, W.; Chen, B.; Shu, F. Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999-2016). Aslib Journal of Information Management, v. 69, n. 5, p. 486–502, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0014.
Ribeiro, N. C.; Oliveira, D. A.; Santos, S. R. O. Ações e estratégias voltadas para a ciência aberta em universidades estaduais paulistas: um estudo multicaso. Em Questão, v. 27, n. 2, p. 164-192, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245272.164-192.
Sampaio, R. C.; Lycarião, D. Análise de conteúdo categorial: manual de aplicação. Brasília: Enap, 2021.
Shibayama, S. Academic commercialization and changing nature of academic cooperation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, v. 25, p. 513-532, 2015. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00191-014-0387-z.
Silva, J. A. T. Does China need to rethink its metrics-and citation-based research rewards policies? Scientometrics, v. 112, n. 3, p. 1853-1857, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2430-y.
Silveira, L. et al. Ciência aberta na perspectiva de especialistas brasileiros: proposta de taxonomia. Encontros Bibli, v. 26, p. 1-27, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2021.e79646.
Sousa, A. S.; Oliveira, G. S.; Alves, L. H. A pesquisa bibliográfica: princípios e fundamentos. Cadernos da Fucamp, v. 20, n. 43, p. 64-83, 2021. Disponível em: https://revistas.fucamp.edu.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/2336. Acesso em: 24 jul. 2021.
Souza, I. V. Métricas da comunicação científica na web: breve histórico da altmetria. In: Araújo, R. F. (coord.). Estudos métricos da informação na Web: atores, ações e dispositivos informacionais. Maceió: EdUFAL, 2015. p. 37-54.
Strevens, M. Scientific sharing: Communism and the social contract. In: Boyer-Kassem, T.; Mayo-Wilson, C.; Weisberg, M. (ed.). Scientific collaboration and collective knowledge. Ney York: Oxford University Press, 2017. p. 3-33. Disponível em: https://philpapers.org/rec/STRSSC-2. Acesso em: 8 jan. 2024.
Trinca, T. P.; Albagli, S. Avaliação da pesquisa científica no âmbito das políticas nacionais de ciência aberta. RDBCI, v. 21, e023021, 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.20396/rdbci.v21i00.8673139.
Veiga, V. S. O. et al. Compartilhamento de dados de pesquisa em neurociências: a percepção luso-brasileira. Cadernos BAD (Portugual), n. 1, p. 320-325, 2018. Disponível em: https://brapci.inf.br/#/v/109996. Acesso em: 16 set. 2024.
Von Mayer, K. Open science needs open infrastructures. On the discussion of the results of the European mutual learning exercise. Open Science: altmetrics and rewards. Mitteilungen der Vereinigung österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare, v. 72, n. 2, p. 337-355, 2019. Disponível em: https://ucrisportal.univie.ac.at/en/publications/offene-wissenschaft-braucht-offene-infrastrukturen-ibzur-diskussi. Acesso em: 18 set. 2024.
Yen, A. et al. A UCSD view on replication and reproducibility for CPS & IoT. In: Benchmarking Cyber-Physical Systems and Internet of Things (CPS-IoTBench2021). Nashville, TN: ACM, 2021. p. 20-25. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3458473.3458821.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Transinformação
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
