The open science review 2020 includes the refinements of Plan S and the tool for checking the Plan S compatibility of publishing channels, it provides a look at the guidelines and recommendations made in national open science coordination, and it provides an overview of the effects of the coronavirus pandemic on the openness of scientific information. The special theme is open access journals that disappear from the web – and the researcher’s means of preserving his or her own research.
Plan S, national open science coordination, EOSC… Last year was an eventful time in open science. Think Open blog’s annual open science review 2019 brings together the highlights, interesting articles and trends of the 2019.
Many reasons are given for self-archiving, and self-archivers follow many different practices. We asked four researchers from different disciplines how and why they self-archive their research results. We also asked the researchers about their views on the promotion of self-archiving. This is the seventh part of the Think Open blog’s article series on self-archiving.
”Responsible research evaluation must look past abstract quantitative indicators and examine research in its true context, which requires qualitative research evaluation approaches and methods.” In this blog article, Joona Lehtomäki, a science adviser at the division of strategic research at the Academy of Finland (Research Councils Finland), writes about research evaluation, role of metrics, impact of research, open science and the qualitative turn in research evaluation. Lehtomäki also outlines what would a turn towards more contextualized and qualitative research evaluation mean in practice.
University of Helsinki Data Support, a network of experts ranging from library staff to lawyers, helps researchers all year long via a service address firstname.lastname@example.org. To be able to develop services, Data Support investigated what are the most frequently asked topics in the service email by researchers. Along with data management plan commenting service, most questions asked by the researchers handled sensitive data management as well as storing solutions.
Self-archiving has many kinds of advantages, such as being free of charge and increasing visibility and effectiveness. This article briefly describes the most important advantages of self-archiving. This is the fourth part of Think Open blog’s article series on self-archiving.
For many researchers, the the Academy of Finland’s September 2019 Call makes data management planning a topical issue. The University of Helsinki Data Support provides support for the preparation of data management plans (DMP). We asked four UH researchers how well the Data Support services responded to their needs.
Think Open Digest journal combines and regroupes articles published on the blog into thematic entities. The first two issues are dedicated to research data management, a current topic due to the Academy of Finland’s September 2019 call.
Vice rector Paula Eerola and associate professor of geoinformatics Tuuli Toivonen discuss the Plan S declaration, open access incentives, research-data issues, data management and corporate collaboration. This is the abstract of the original posts, part 1 and part 2 (in Finnish).
What does a great data management plan (DMP) look like? The DataSupport at the University of Helsinki is regularly asked for examples and models of good plans. Here are the best pieces of advice for a researcher to create a great DMP.