|
Over the past 18 years or so, Open Access (OA) has moved from an experimental idea to an established mode of scientific communication, growing from as few as 523 published articles in 2001 to 217,956 in 2015 (OASPA), or as much as 45% of all new research published in 2015 according to some sources (Piwowar et al). That’s a trend that’s likely to continue in the lead-up to Plan S implementation. As OA continues to advance, the research community is expanding its focus to support for Open Science more broadly.
What is the difference between Open Access and Open Science—and why does it matter? | |
|
|
“Every now and then a man's mind is stretched by a new idea or sensation, and never shrinks back to its former dimensions.”
— Oliver Wendell Holmes | |
|
|
|
Open Access is a significant part of Open Science–but it isn’t the whole story. Here’s the difference: | |
|
Open Access is the free, immediate, online availability of research articles, coupled with the right to share, distribute, and reuse these articles fully. | | |
|
Open Science is the free online availability of a range of primary research outputs, and the scientific evaluation of research, with little to no restriction. | | | | |
|
|
|
Put another way, Open Access gives everyone the right to read and reuse published research articles. Open Science includes Open Access to articles, but goes even further--applying the principles of OA to the entire research cycle. | |
Open Science aims to surface parts of the scientific process that aren’t usually included in a standard research article, but which are nevertheless key to reproducing and building upon the work. For example, Open Science encompasses:
|
• |
Datasets, materials and code |
|
• |
Detailed protocols and methods |
|
• |
Preliminary results and early drafts |
|
• |
Peer reviews and editorial decision letters...and more | | |
|
|
|
|
|
In our next issue, we’ll take a closer look at some examples of Open Science in the wild, and share some easy ways to get involved Open research practices.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Till next time, read more about the history and rise of OA and the shift to Open Science | |
|
The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009, M. Laakso, P. Welling, H. Bukvova, L. Nyman, B.C. Björk, et al (2011)
OA emerges as a theory in the early 1990s and rises to prominence in the 2000s. |
|
Revisiting ‘the 1990s debutante’: scholar-led publishing and the pre-history of the open access movement, S. Moore (2019)
Scientists aren’t the only ones. In this preprint, PLOS-alum Sam Moore discusses the early history of OA in the humanities. |
|
The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles, H. Piwowar, J. Priem, V. Larivière, J.P. Alperin, L. Matthias, et al (2018)
How much are OA articles read, and what sort of impact do they have? |
|
Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond, C. Allen and D.M. A. Mehler (2019)
An editorial discussing the potential benefits of Open Science, and how it may affect ECRs. |
|
Promoting an open research culture, B. A. Nosek, G. Alter, G. C. Banks, D. Borsboom, S. D. Bowman, et al (2015)
The Center for Open Science (COS) proposes a set of standards for cultivating openness in research. | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Library of Science
1160 Battery St. Suite 225
San Francisco, CA 94111
US | | |
|
|
