Publishing models, assessment, and open science: Report and outcomes from a workshop held by the Global Young Academy

peter.suber's bookmarks 2018-10-31



"D. "Open” science

− What should “open access” actually mean, and where does it go wrong?

− What steps should be taken immediately in order to make the voice of researchers heard?

− How “open” should science be? Why does “open science” work or not work?

− To what extent is “openness” in conflict with receiving deserved credit?

− Does “open” imply a mandate to communicate rather than just publish?

− Who owns science? What proprietary rights should be protected, and how does copyright go together with openness?

− How should we value the creation of research data?

− How do we break away from “quality” being associated with specific forms of output and context? (↔ quality assessment) ...

 Given that most members of the public are unable to understand the research articles, “open access” constitutes no more than “open retrieval” for them, and they do not benefit directly...


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags: oa.open_science oa.assessment oa.quality oa.copyright oa.business_models oa.intelligibility oa.lay oa.recommendations

Date tagged:

10/31/2018, 10:49

Date published:

10/31/2018, 06:49