A more open science | Pizza, beer and science
"I spent two days last week at Publish or Perish 2014 here at UC Davis. A lot of the discussion centered around 'open science'. This term refers to a movement to better disseminate scientific knowledge and make it available to everyone for free. There are big pushes from the open access crowd to make scientific papers available for free, make data and statistical code freely available and easily accessible, and in general improve scientific communication. I am all for this. I try to do this. As a rule I make all of my papers available for free and also publish the data and code required to replicate everything I did in that paper. The reasons people promote open science are varied. I do it because I want to be transparent in everything I do. But is sharing our data, code, and papers enough? What about opening our accounting books? Most researchers in the US get grants from the government to conduct studies, and they must submit budgets for their work. Opening the accounting books would improve the odds that the money is being spent in a manner that is in line with the grant. What are the pros and cons of this? Would this be good, bad or somewhere in the middle. I'd like to hear what others think ..."