For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
2,011
views
151
references
 Top references
cited by
212
    
0 reviews
 Review
1
comments
 Comment
3
recommends
+1 Recommend
7 collections
    7
    shares
      318
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How open science helps researchers succeed

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Open access, open data, open source and other open scholarship practices are growing in popularity and necessity. However, widespread adoption of these practices has not yet been achieved. One reason is that researchers are uncertain about how sharing their work will affect their careers. We review literature demonstrating that open research is associated with increases in citations, media attention, potential collaborators, job opportunities and funding opportunities. These findings are evidence that open research practices bring significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.

          DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16800.001

          Related collections

          Most cited references151

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Investigating Variation in Replicability

          Richard A. Klein, Kate A Ratliff, Michelangelo Vianello … (2014)
          Although replication is a central tenet of science, direct replications are rare in psychology. This research tested variation in the replicability of 13 classic and contemporary effects across 36 independent samples totaling 6,344 participants. In the aggregate, 10 effects replicated consistently. One effect – imagined contact reducing prejudice – showed weak support for replicability. And two effects – flag priming influencing conservatism and currency priming influencing system justification – did not replicate. We compared whether the conditions such as lab versus online or US versus international sample predicted effect magnitudes. By and large they did not. The results of this small sample of effects suggest that replicability is more dependent on the effect itself than on the sample and setting used to investigate the effect.
          Article 0 comments Cited 315 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research.

            P O Seglen (1997)
            Article 0 comments Cited 288 times    Rated -3 of 5. – based on 1 reviews
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research

              P O Seglen (1997)
              Article 0 comments Cited 245 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Peter Rodgers: Role: Reviewing editor
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): eLife
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Elife
                Journal ID (hwp): eLife
                Journal ID (publisher-id): eLife
                Title: eLife
                Publisher: eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
                ISSN (Electronic): 2050-084X
                Publication date (Electronic, pub): 07 July 2016
                Publication date Collection: 2016
                Volume: 5
                Electronic Location Identifier: e16800
                Affiliations
                [1 ]deptDepartment of Physics, Faculty of Science , National Autonomous University of Mexico , Mexico City, Mexico
                [2 ]deptOffice of the Director , National Institutes of Health , Bethesda, United States
                [3 ]deptPopulation Health and Reproduction , University of California, Davis , Davis, United States
                [4 ]Laura and John Arnold Foundation , Houston, United States
                [5 ]BioMed Central , London, United Kingdom
                [6 ]CrossRef , Oxford, United Kingdom
                [7 ]deptInstitute for Computational Engineering and Sciences , University of Texas at Austin , Austin, United States
                [8 ]Center for Open Science , Charlottesville, United States
                [9 ]deptBerkeley Institute for Data Science , University of California, Berkeley , Berkeley, United States
                [10 ]deptDepartment of Engineering and Society , University of Virginia , Charlottesville, United States
                [11 ]deptMozilla Science Lab , Mozilla Foundation , New York, United States
                [12 ]Gesmer Updegrove LLP , Boston, United States
                [13 ]deptCenter for Environmental Research, Education, and Outreach , Washington State University , Pullman, United States
                [14 ]deptInformation School , University of Washington , Seattle, United States
                [15 ]deptDepartment of Psychology , University of Texas at Austin , Austin, United States
                [16]eLife , United Kingdom
                [17]eLife , United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9430-5221
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7618-7292
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3030-8001
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5125-4188
                Article
                Publisher ID: 16800
                DOI: 10.7554/eLife.16800
                PMC ID: 4973366
                PubMed ID: 27387362
                SO-VID: 512446cf-b3d6-4d07-9c51-01e61b79fb73
                Copyright © © 2016, McKiernan et al
                License:

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

                History
                Date received : 08 April 2016
                Date accepted : 04 July 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000049, National Institute on Aging;
                Award ID: R24AG048124
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Laura and John Arnold Foundation;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000925, John Templeton Foundation;
                Award ID: 46545
                Award Recipient :
                The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
                Categories
                Subject: Point of View
                Subject: Feature Article
                Custom metadata
                elife-xml-version 2.5
                Author impact statement Open research practices bring significant benefits to researchers.

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Life sciences
                Keywords: open access,open data,open science,open source,research,none
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Life sciences
                Keywords: open access, open data, open science, open source, research, none

                Comments

                wrote:

                This article shows well the benefits for open science that are not that obvious. One would not expect these, so it is nice that this article can give evidence for these facts, to give more confidence to scientist that want to openly publish their article. However, I can still see that the financial benefits of publishing for a writer can go beyond these advantages, and that financial security also plays a big role when it comes to scientists who just started their carreers. 

                 

                2019-04-18 14:52 UTC
                +1
                One person recommends this

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content318

                See all similar

                Cited by198

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors1,513

                See all reference authors