## Open Science at Universities ##
In order to increase transparency and credibility in science, universities must enable and reward such actions. Below are specific steps, policies, or resources that universities can take to incentive open science.
### Policies ###
- Template of [TOP Guidelines for research institutes].
- Become a signatory of [DORA] or [TOP].
- [European Open Science Policy Platform]
- [Recommendations from the G7 Science Ministers]:
- Include Open Science research indicators and metrics during the evaluation and assessment of researchers
- Ensure every researcher’s ability to deposit, access, and analyze scientific data across disciplines and borders
- Adhere to the FAIR data principles of being findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable
- Train researchers in Open Science and data skills
- Develop common good practice standards
- This [Author Compliance Tool by Wiley] includes university policies about data sharing, preprints, and open access publishing.
### What Universities are Doing to Promote Open Science ###
- [Berlin’s Charité University Hospital]
- [...Incentives to raise awareness and nudge clinicians and researchers toward adopting responsible research and open science practices. For example, any institutional investigator can apply to receive a 1,000-Euro research bonus for publishing a null result, a replication study, a preregistered preclinical study, a paper that reuses data previously published by others, or a study that included patient engagement.]
- Applicants now answer questions related to a variety of scholarly outputs including open science, team science, and stakeholder engagement.
- The [University of Bristol] described open science practices in its hiring criteria and is establishing a new [Chair of Academic Research Quality and Improvement and six associated Fellowships].
- The [Open Science Center at Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München] (Ludwig Maximilian University, LMU, of Munich). A result of the work by [their open science committee]
- [Southern Methodist University, SMU Department of Psychology]'s [open science policy]
- [Towards an Open Science Programme for Utrecht University]
- [TU Delft Guidelines for Open Science]
- [The CITEC Open Science Manifesto]
- [Open Science at Arizona State University]
- [Open Scholarship at Indiana University Bloomington]
- [University of Helsinki]
- [University of New Hampshire]
- [University of Leicester]
- [Universities UK]
- [Leibniz Information Centre for Economics at the Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel]
- [University of Eastern Finland]
- Master's students at the University of Amersterdam Psychology Department must clearly indicate whether or not results arise from confirmatory or exploratory processes. See the internship proposal form [here].
- [Open UBC]
- A curated collection of resources for faculty and students to learn about the why, what and how of open education practices and what they mean to teaching and learning at UBC
- The University of Utah Department of Psychology [requires that Masters' proposals be preregistered]
- Carnegie Mellon University Libraries has an [Open Science Program]
- Supports collaborative, transparent, and reusable research across all disciplines with digital research tools, trainings, events, outreach and partnership with other campus units, and a team of expert consultants and collaborators.
### Examples of job announcements that mention open science ###
- [Department of Psychology, University of Oregon]
- [Department of Psychology at the Faculty of Human Sciences of the University of Cologne]
- [Model job language]
- "Our department embraces the values of open science and strives for replicable and reproducible research. We therefore support transparent research with open data, open material, and pre-registrations. Candidates are asked to describe in what way they have already pursued and/or plan to pursue open science." [from University of Toronto]
- Add a new question to standardized committee interview: "Describe any steps you have taken to implement the principles of open science in your research" ([Shared] by Russell Warne from Utah Valley University)
- Additional examples compiled by Felix Schönbrodt here: https://osf.io/7jbnt/
### Resources ###
- "[How significant are the public dimensions of faculty work in review, promotion, and tenure documents?]"
- "[Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure]"
- [OSF for Institutions] is a free scholarly web tool that enhances transparency, fosters collaboration, and increases the visibility of research outputs at the institutional level.
- A [leaderboard] of universities whose researchers have taken the [Prereg Challenge].
### Current misuse of journal metrics in university decision making ###
- [Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations]
- "We... collected and analyzed [review, promotion, and tenure] documents from a representative sample of 129 universities from the United States and Canada and 381 of their academic units. We found that 40% of doctoral, research-intensive (R-type) institutions and 18% of master’s, or comprehensive (M-type) institutions explicitly mentioned the JIF, or closely related terms, in their RPT documents."
- [Meta-Research: How significant are the public dimensions of faculty work in review, promotion and tenure documents?]
- "...we analyzed review, promotion, and tenure documents from a representative sample of 129 universities in the US and Canada. Terms and concepts related to public and community are mentioned in a large portion of documents, but mostly in ways that relate to service, which is an undervalued aspect of academic careers."