Keeping science reproducible in a world of custom code and data | Ars Technica

peter.suber's bookmarks 2021-11-21


"Daniella Lowenberg, principal investigator of the Make Data Count initiative, describes the ideals to which these data-sharing requirements aspire. "We want a world where data are routinely being used for discovery, to advance science, for evidence-based and data-driven policy," she says. In some places, the future is already here. "There are data sets that drive entire fields," she says, and "the field of research would not be where it is without these open data sets that are driving it." As an example, she points to this data set of the wood density of 16,468 trees, which has been downloaded over 17,000 times.

With that ideal in mind, journal editors increasingly make publication contingent upon open data and code. I checked about 2,700 journals published by Springer, one of the largest publishers of academic journals, for submission guidelines that state that authors must make all materials like data and code available.

The results suggest that open data and code is more of a custom in some fields than others. Among ecology journals, 37 percent have an availability requirement, while only 7 percent of surgery and 6 percent of education journals do. Other fields are between these extremes, with 16 to 23 percent of management, engineering, math, economics, medicine, and psychology journals stating such a requirement...."


From feeds:

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

Tags: oa.open_science oa.reproducibility oa.code oa.journals oa.policies oa.policies.journals

Date tagged:

11/21/2021, 10:36

Date published:

11/21/2021, 05:36