• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

开放科学活动与实际认可体系之间的差距:来自一项国际调查的见解

Gaps between Open Science activities and actual recognition systems: Insights from an international survey.

作者信息

Grattarola Florencia, Shmagun Hanna, Erdmann Christopher, Cambon-Thomsen Anne, Thomsen Mogens, Kim Jaesoo, Mabile Laurence

机构信息

Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.

Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Seoul, South Korea.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2024 Dec 16;19(12):e0315632. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315632. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0315632
PMID:39680530
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11649118/
Abstract

There are global movements aiming to promote reform of the traditional research evaluation and reward systems. However, a comprehensive picture of the existing best practices and efforts across various institutions to integrate Open Science into these frameworks remains underdeveloped and not fully known. The aim of this study was to identify perceptions and expectations of various research communities worldwide regarding how Open Science activities are (or should be) formally recognised and rewarded. To achieve this, a global survey was conducted in the framework of the Research Data Alliance, recruiting 230 participants from five continents and 37 countries. Despite most participants reporting that their organisation had one form or another of formal Open Science policies, the majority indicated that their organisation lacks any initiative or tool that provides specific credits or rewards for Open Science activities. However, researchers from France, the United States, the Netherlands and Finland affirmed having such mechanisms in place. The study found that, among various Open Science activities, Open or FAIR data management and sharing stood out as especially deserving of explicit recognition and credit. Open Science indicators in research evaluation and/or career progression processes emerged as the most preferred type of reward.

摘要

全球有多项旨在推动传统研究评估和奖励体系改革的行动。然而,对于各机构将开放科学融入这些框架的现有最佳实践和努力的全面情况,仍未充分发展且未被完全了解。本研究的目的是确定全球各研究群体对于开放科学活动如何(或应如何)得到正式认可和奖励的看法与期望。为实现这一目标,在研究数据联盟的框架内进行了一项全球调查,从五大洲37个国家招募了230名参与者。尽管大多数参与者报告称其所在机构有某种形式的正式开放科学政策,但多数人表示其所在机构缺乏为开放科学活动提供特定学分或奖励的任何举措或工具。然而,来自法国、美国、荷兰和芬兰的研究人员确认有此类机制。研究发现,在各种开放科学活动中,开放或符合FAIR原则的数据管理和共享尤为值得明确认可和计分。研究评估和/或职业发展过程中的开放科学指标成为最受欢迎的奖励类型。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/47c8c199e22e/pone.0315632.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/da10fe884d47/pone.0315632.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/c508fa3cebfb/pone.0315632.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/a1e32d893afa/pone.0315632.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/47c8c199e22e/pone.0315632.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/da10fe884d47/pone.0315632.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/c508fa3cebfb/pone.0315632.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/a1e32d893afa/pone.0315632.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cf8/11649118/47c8c199e22e/pone.0315632.g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Gaps between Open Science activities and actual recognition systems: Insights from an international survey.开放科学活动与实际认可体系之间的差距:来自一项国际调查的见解
PLoS One. 2024 Dec 16;19(12):e0315632. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315632. eCollection 2024.
2
An international, cross-sectional survey of preprint attitudes among biomedical researchers.一项针对生物医学研究人员预印本态度的国际、横断面调查。
F1000Res. 2024 Nov 4;13:6. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.143013.2. eCollection 2024.
3
Perceptions of research integrity and open science practices: a survey of Brazilian dental researchers.对研究诚信和开放科学实践的认知:巴西牙科研究人员的一项调查
Braz Oral Res. 2024 Dec 20;38:e135. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0135. eCollection 2024.
4
Investigating the practices and preferences of health scholars in sharing open research data.调查健康领域学者在共享开放研究数据方面的做法和偏好。
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 12;20(2):e0313644. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313644. eCollection 2025.
5
Unlocking renewable energy potential: Overcoming knowledge sharing hurdles in rural EU regions on example of poland, sweden and france.释放可再生能源潜力:以波兰、瑞典和法国为例,克服欧盟农村地区的知识共享障碍。
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 10;20(4):e0320965. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0320965. eCollection 2025.
6
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
7
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
8
Strategic priorities and challenges in research software funding: Results from an international survey.研究软件资金的战略重点与挑战:一项国际调查的结果
F1000Res. 2025 Jan 6;13:1447. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.155879.2. eCollection 2024.
9
The state of open science in the field of psychology and law.心理学与法律领域的开放科学状况。
Law Hum Behav. 2025 Feb;49(1):54-70. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000592. Epub 2025 Jan 20.
10
Search, reuse and sharing of research data in materials science and engineering-A qualitative interview study.材料科学与工程领域研究数据的搜索、复用与共享:一项定性访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 15;15(9):e0239216. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239216. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

1
Habits and perceptions regarding open science by researchers from Spanish institutions.西班牙研究人员的开放科学习惯和观念。
PLoS One. 2023 Jul 13;18(7):e0288313. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288313. eCollection 2023.
2
What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption.是什么驱动和抑制研究人员共享和使用开放研究数据?一项系统文献综述分析影响开放研究数据采用的因素。
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 18;15(9):e0239283. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239283. eCollection 2020.
3
How open science helps researchers succeed.
开放科学如何助力研究人员取得成功。
Elife. 2016 Jul 7;5:e16800. doi: 10.7554/eLife.16800.
4
The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review.开放获取的学术、经济和社会影响:基于证据的综述。
F1000Res. 2016 Apr 11;5:632. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.8460.3. eCollection 2016.
5
Quantifying the use of bioresources for promoting their sharing in scientific research.量化生物资源的使用,以促进其在科学研究中的共享。
Gigascience. 2013 May 1;2(1):7. doi: 10.1186/2047-217X-2-7.
6
Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science.科学产出与认可:一项关于科学奖励系统运作的研究。
Am Sociol Rev. 1967 Jun;32(3):377-90.