IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v6y2018i2p27-d153185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Science Support as a Portfolio of Services and Projects: From Awareness to Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Birgit Schmidt

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Andrea Bertino

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Daniel Beucke

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Helene Brinken

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Najko Jahn

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Lisa Matthias

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Julika Mimkes

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Katharina Müller

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Astrid Orth

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Margo Bargheer

    (State and University Library, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Together with many other universities worldwide, the University of Göttingen has aimed to unlock the full potential of networked digital scientific communication by strengthening open access as early as the late 1990s. Open science policies at the institutional level consequently followed and have been with us for over a decade. However, for several reasons, their adoption often is still far from complete when it comes to the practices of researchers or research groups. To improve this situation at our university, there is dedicated support at the infrastructural level: the university library collaborates with several campus units in developing and running services, activities and projects in support of open access and open science. This article outlines our main activity areas and aligns them with the overall rationale to reach higher uptake and acceptance of open science practice at the university. The mentioned examples of our activities highlight how we seek to advance open science along the needs and perspectives of diverse audiences and by running it as a multi-stakeholder endeavor. Therefore, our activities involve library colleagues with diverse backgrounds, faculty and early career researchers, research managers, as well as project and infrastructure staff. We conclude with a summary of achievements and challenges to be faced.

Suggested Citation

  • Birgit Schmidt & Andrea Bertino & Daniel Beucke & Helene Brinken & Najko Jahn & Lisa Matthias & Julika Mimkes & Katharina Müller & Astrid Orth & Margo Bargheer, 2018. "Open Science Support as a Portfolio of Services and Projects: From Awareness to Engagement," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-19, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:6:y:2018:i:2:p:27-:d:153185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/6/2/27/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/6/2/27/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincent Larivière & Stefanie Haustein & Philippe Mongeon, 2015. "The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anja Oberländer & Torsten Reimer, 2019. "Open Access and the Library," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-2, January.
    2. Alejandra Manco, 2022. "A Landscape of Open Science Policies Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephan Puehringer & Johanna Rath & Teresa Griesebner, 2021. "The political economy of academic publishing: On the commodification of a public good," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.
    2. de Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira & de Albuquerque, Sofia & Toth, Janderson Pereira & Bello, Debora Zava, 2018. "International cooperation networks of the BRICS bloc," SocArXiv b6x43, Center for Open Science.
    3. Jesse L. Reynolds & Edward A. Parson, 2020. "Nonstate governance of solar geoengineering research," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 323-342, May.
    4. You, Taekho & Park, Jinseo & Lee, June Young & Yun, Jinhyuk & Jung, Woo-Sung, 2022. "Disturbance of questionable publishing to academia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    5. Schmal, W. Benedikt & Haucap, Justus & Knoke, Leon, 2023. "The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    6. Korytkowski, Przemyslaw & Kulczycki, Emanuel, 2021. "The gap between Plan S requirements and grantees’ publication practices," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    7. Najko Jahn & Lisa Matthias & Mikael Laakso, 2022. "Toward transparency of hybrid open access through publisher‐provided metadata: An article‐level study of Elsevier," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(1), pages 104-118, January.
    8. Justus Haucap & Nima Moshgbar & W. Benedikt Schmal, 2021. "The impact of the German 'DEAL' on competition in the academic publishing market," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2027-2049, December.
    9. Yurij L. Katchanov & Yulia V. Markova, 2017. "The “space of physics journals”: topological structure and the Journal Impact Factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 313-333, October.
    10. Bo-Christer Björk, 2017. "Scholarly journal publishing in transition- from restricted to open access," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(2), pages 101-109, May.
    11. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Jin Wang, 2022. "A study of interdisciplinary accounting research: analysing the diversity of cited references," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2131-2162, June.
    12. Samuel A. Moore, 2020. "Revisiting “the 1990s debutante”: Scholar‐led publishing and the prehistory of the open access movement," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(7), pages 856-866, July.
    13. Jussi T. S. Heikkila, 2022. "Journal of Economic Literature codes classification system (JEL)," Papers 2207.06076, arXiv.org.
    14. Wrzesinski, Marcel & Riechert, Patrick Urs & Dubois, Frédéric & Katzenbach, Christian, 2021. "Working with publication technology to make open access journals sustainable," EconStor Preprints 231355, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. William H. Walters, 2022. "Can differences in publisher size account for the relatively low prices of the journals available to master’s universities through commercial publishers’ databases? The importance of price discriminat," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 1065-1097, February.
    16. Andrea Caputo & Mariya Kargina, 2022. "A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 82-88, March.
    17. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Daniel J. Dunleavy & Mina Moradzadeh & Joshua Eykens, 2021. "A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8589-8616, October.
    18. Li Yan & Wang Zhiping, 2023. "Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, March.
    19. Abdelghani Maddi & Emmanuel Monneau & Catherine Guaspare-Cartron & Floriana Gargiulo & Michel Dubois, 2024. "Streetlight effect in PubPeer comments: are Open Access publications more scrutinized?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4231-4247, July.
    20. Chavarro, Diego & Tang, Puay & Ràfols, Ismael, 2017. "Why researchers publish in non-mainstream journals: Training, knowledge bridging, and gap filling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1666-1680.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:6:y:2018:i:2:p:27-:d:153185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.