Summary of Open Science Results
This report presents in detail the results of the first pilot study of the Berlin Science Survey (BSS) on the topic of open science. The term open science covers various scientific practices that aim to improve the accessibility, traceability and reusability of scientific results. The BSS specifically addressed open access publications, data sharing, code and material sharing, open peer review, and citizen science. In addition to the prevalence of the individual open science practices, attitudes and assessments of the scientists were also surveyed, providing information on the extent to which the science policy goal of expanding open science is shared among scientists. The central results are:
- Scientists broadly accept the expansion of open science, with the majority of scientists in the Berlin research area expressing positive attitudes towards open science and considering its expansion to be important for science.
- The majority of them expect an expansion of open science to have positive effects for science in general. However, about one third of the respondents also see risks and dangers. The higher status groups, especially professors, and of the various subject groups especially humanities scientists tend to be more skeptical about the effects of open science.
- The spread of open science varies between subject groups and for each of the five addressed practices. Open access publishing is the most widespread practice. Scientists report that between 46% (in the humanities) and 64% (in the natural sciences) of their publications are publicly and freely accessible. In general, there is a positive correlation between practicing open science and having positive attitudes towards open science.
- Quite a few respondents see hurdles in the implementation of individual open science practices. A quarter of the respondents see great or very great difficulties in implementing open access publishing, and just under half see difficulties with data sharing. These assessments vary according to status, but above all according to which research field a scientist belongs to. Two-fifths of the respondents would like to see more support for the implementation of open science from their institution.
From the findings of the report, the following recommendations for action can be derived:
Open science is an umbrella term for several practices that have different implementation possibilities in different research contexts. This means that any of the individual practices cannot be implemented by all scientists to the same extent and in the same way. So far, open science has been promoted mainly on a broad scale, but it should be more targeted, as not all scientists benefit from the same support and incentive structures. Research context and the associated research fields should be considered when implementing control policies and support concepts. The identification of specific hurdles and implementation difficulties in the concrete research situations of scientists is the prerequisite for targeted measures for promoting open science, building on the participation of researchers. This requires not only quantitative cross-sectional data, but also more in-depth qualitative analyses.