What’s Keeping Us from Open Science? Is It the Powers That Be, Or Is It… Us? from Smartley-Dunn on Vimeo.
Despite all its wonders, science today operates under some enormous constraints, many of them concentrated around the academic paper, which started as a way to spread science faster and wider, but now often serves more as a bottleneck than a conduit. The so-called “open science” movement is trying to change this. At ScienceOnline in North Carolina a few weeks ago, I moderated a panel that discussed these efforts. The program description is below.
Related sessions included Open Notebook Science, on how scientists can better share data, and one on how the web is changing how we measure scientific impact.
What’s keeping us from Open Science? Is it the powers the be, or is it … us?
David Dobbs, Melody Dye, Jan Reichelt, Kristi Holmes, John Timmer, Sara Wood
There’s been a lot of talk about open science — the need to not only make all science publications open-access, but to change current research, publication, and reputational structures to take full advantage of the internet, and to accelerate and enrich the flow and development of scientific data, idea, findings, and discussion. But what’s holding us back? What changes need be made to ensure a) free and open access to scientific results and publications and b) a more free, open, faster flow of scientific information? Can we just start publishing papers on blogs and let the hivemind replace peer review? Do open notebooks really work? How can we encourage scientists to contribute by reviewing and commenting on others’ work rather than focusing just on “the paper”? We’ll discuss these questions, as well as a) where the current bottlenecks are b) key functions served by current structures (such as publishing, peer review, and credit/reputation systems) that need to be replaced in an open system; and c) ideas and efforts already underway to serve those new functions.