201. A tale of two 'opens': intersections between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship
- Author
-
Daniel Gunnarson, Paola Masuzzo, Josmel Pacheco-Mendoza, Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Simon Worthington, Peter Murray-Rust, Ksenija Baždarić, Thomas Rhys Evans, Johanna Havemann, Leo Lahti, Marcel Knöchelmann, Paolo Manghi, Tal Yarkoni, Daniel J. Dunleavy, Gustav Nilsonne, Nicholas M. Gardner, Bart Penders, Olivier Pourret, Daniel Graziotin, Jonathan P. Tennant, Christopher R. Madan, David Brassard, Ritwik Agrawal, Jadranka Stojanovski, Rutger A. Vos, Alberto Marocchino, Mohammad Hosseini, Tom Crick, Bastian Greshake Tzovaras, John Samuel, Tobias Steiner, Sanjay Narayanaswamy, Daniel S. Katz, Alejandro Uribe Tirado, and Michael Rera
- Subjects
Open science ,bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Library and Information Science|Scholarly Communication ,SocArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Library and Information Science|Scholarly Publishing ,Computer science ,SocArXiv|Education|Higher Education ,Open source software ,Data science ,Scholarly communication ,Boundary (real estate) ,SocArXiv|Education ,Open data ,Scholarship ,Open source ,Open research ,bepress|Education ,SocArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Library and Information Science ,bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences ,scholarly communication ,replicability ,open source ,floss ,open access ,bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Library and Information Science|Scholarly Publishing ,SocArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences ,bepress|Education|Higher Education ,bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Library and Information Science ,SocArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Library and Information Science|Scholarly Communication - Abstract
There is no clear-cut boundary between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship, and the histories, practices, and fundamental principles between the two remain complex. In this study, we critically appraise the intersections and differences between the two movements. Based on our thematic comparison here, we conclude several key things. First, there is substantial scope for new communities of practice to form within scholarly communities that place sharing and collaboration/open participation at their focus. Second, Both the principles and practices of FOSS can be more deeply ingrained within scholarship, asserting a balance between pragmatism and social ideology. Third, at the present, Open Scholarship risks being subverted and compromised by commercial players. Fourth, the shift and acceleration towards a system of Open Scholarship will be greatly enhanced by a concurrent shift in recognising a broader range of practices and outputs beyond traditional peer review and research articles. In order to achieve this, we propose the formulation of a new type of institutional mandate. We believe that there is substantial need for research funders to invest in sustainable open scholarly infrastructure, and the communities that support them, to avoid the capture and enclosure of key research services that would prevent optimal researcher behaviours. Such a shift could ultimately lead to a healthier scientific culture, and a system where competition is replaced by collaboration, resources (including time and people) are shared and acknowledged more efficiently, and the research becomes inherently more rigorous, verified, and reproducible.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF