[![enter image description here][1]][2]
## [Open Science at ACSESS May 2017 Editor's Meeting][3] ##
----------
### Outputs (Draft) ###
- In principle approval to move ahead with at least level 1, "disclosure" requirements for data sharing policies.
- Possible language for adoption is [here][4], which could be published on ACSESS's [author resource page][5] or within its [style manual][6].
- Improve data sharing standard specificty, using the [standards created for the open data badge][7] as a minimum starting point and adding specific requirements for complete reporting. Consider using "data dictionary" [guidelines][8] (aka code book, or meta-data) created by COS for suggested content on columns, units, and variables.
- In principle approval to identify current reporting guidelines, point authors to these reporting guidelines, and then to identify missing reporting guidelines for future development and improvement.
- See: [Principles for creating reporting guidelines in order to increase design and analysis transparency][9]
- **Suggestions for current resources to point to:**
- [Reporting guidelines for papers to be potentially useful for later meta-analysis][10]
- [Nature's reporting checklist for life science articles][11]
- [ARRIVE][12] (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments)
- [CONSORT][13] Guidelines for reporting RCTs
- [NIH clearinghouse of related content][14]
- Consider adoption of [Open Science Badges][15] for those authors who choose to share data, share materials.
- No final decision about preregistration or Registered Reports, but consider rewarding those who try it out through the [Preregistration Challenge][16] or through the badging program.
----------
### Background ###
The [Center for Open Science][17] is a non-profit technology company whose mission is to increase the reproducibility of scientific research. To acheive that mission, we use a three part strategy:
1. We conduct meta-science to measure the barriers to reproducibility (e.g. Reproducibility Projects in [Psychology][18] and [Cancer Biology][19])
2. We advocate for policies and incentives to address the problems highlighted by our meta-science work
- **The TOP Guidelines** ([website][20] | [flyer][21])
- **Preregistration** ([website][22] | [flyer][23])
- **Registered Reports** ([website][24] | [flyer][25] | [detailed author and reviewer instructions][26])
- **Open Practice Badges** ([website][27] | [flyer][28])
3. We build tools to enable the actions for which we advocate. Our flagship project is the [Open Science Framework][29], which is a tool for collaboration, data sharing, archiving, a registration of research hypotheses.
----------
### To Prepare ###
- Read A Manifesto for Reproducible Science ([Chambers et al., 2017][30])
- Skim the FAQ section on the Registered Report website [https://cos.io/rr/][31]
- Identify any questions or barriers to adopting one or more of the incentives for open science.
A desired outcome for this meeting is to prepare to implement any of the above solutions. Please come prepared to act!
----------
### Draft Agenda ###
- Presentation: **Transparency increases credibility and relevance of research** [https://osf.io/ca6vh/][32]
- Barriers to reproducibility
- Evidence of problems
- Policy and training solutions
- Infrastructure solutions
- General discussion and Q&A
- Focused discussion:
- Which initiatives can work for your journal?
- What barriers do you perceive to particular projects?
- Which initiatives would you be able to try?
- Could various initiatives work as a regular submission option or as a special issue?
----------
#### Contact information ####
- David Mellor
- Project Manager, Journal and Funder Initiatives
- [Center for Open Science][33]
- david@cos.io
- [https://osf.io/qthsf][34]
[1]: http://i.imgur.com/BSuK9mP.png
[2]: https://osf.io/z4m9j/wiki/home/?view
[3]: https://osf.io/z4m9j/wiki/home/?view
[4]: https://osf.io/ndupj/
[5]: https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/authors
[6]: https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/style/
[7]: https://osf.io/g6u5k/
[8]: http://help.osf.io/m/bestpractices/l/618767-how-to-make-a-data-dictionary
[9]: https://osf.io/yjfgc/
[10]: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/2041-210X.12758/full
[11]: https://www.nature.com/authors/policies/checklist.pdf
[12]: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines
[13]: http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-2010
[14]: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/research_report_guide.html
[15]: http://cos.io/badges
[16]: http://cos.io/prereg
[17]: https://cos.io
[18]: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716
[19]: http://www.nature.com/news/cancer-reproducibility-project-releases-first-results-1.21304
[20]: https://cos.io/top
[21]: https://osf.io/pav3y/
[22]: https://cos.io/prereg
[23]: https://osf.io/hf3ty/
[24]: https://cos.io/rr
[25]: https://osf.io/xurr6/
[26]: https://osf.io/b69gs
[27]: https://cos.io/badges
[28]: https://osf.io/2kpnr/
[29]: https://osf.io
[30]: http://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-016-0021
[31]: https://cos.io/rr/
[32]: https://osf.io/ca6vh/
[33]: http://cos.io
[34]: https://osf.io/qthsf