[![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