DOI: 10.3897/rio.9.e96476

Authors: Étienne Serbe-Kamp, Jens Bemme, Daniel Pollak, Katja Mayer

Abstract: Citizen Science or community science has been around for a long time. The scope of community involvement in Citizen Science initiatives ranges from short-term data collection to intensive engagement to delve into a research topic together with scientists and/or other volunteers. Although many volunteer researchers have academic training, it is not a prerequisite for participation in research projects. It is important to adhere to scientific standards, which include, above all, transparency with regard to the methodology of data collection and public discussion of the results, and open educational resources (OER). Hereby, Citizen Science is closely linked to Open Science. In our contribution, we will introduce two projects, both developed within the Wikimedia Fellowship Freies Wissen.The top-down approach: ERGo! An Entomology Research Tool to raise awareness of biodiversity protection.Inclusion in academia and pressing social problems such as climate change are fundamentally social justice issues. To facilitate early participation in the scientific process on the part of people holding underrepresented identities in science, we develop a Citizen Science initiative based on a low-cost open-source platform (ERGo!) to perform a technique for electrical recordings from insect eyes known as electroretinograms (ERGs) while presenting visual stimuli. Pasadena Unified School District High School students pilot ERG experiments to test the feasibility of this technique as a large-scale Citizen Science initiative. With ERGo!, future Citizen Scientists contribute data to cutting-edge research that monitors insect biodiversity, adaptation, and health in rapidly changing environments caused by monocultures, pesticides, and climate change.The bottom-up approach: Open cultural data collection. A Citizen Science initiative for regional knowledge curation.We catalogued the 18th century German magazine ‘Die Gartenlaube’ (in Wikisource) with bibliographic metadata in Wikidata in a project called ‘Die Datenlaube’. We develop collaborative approaches for linked open data methods to produce data sets about historical knowledge. The concept of ‘Open Citizen Science’ offers a methodological baseline for Open Science practises in fields of digital humanities. Scanned documents and structured open metadata revealed open access to historic collections. Through the Wikimedia platforms 'Die Datenlaube' creates possibilities to edit entries, to design own investigations, and to contribute to OER.Based on the elaboration of the two rather different projects (natural and social sciences, involvement of pupils vs citizens, top-down vs bottom-up), we will discuss similarities and hence the challenges and lessons learned for using and developing Open Science elements in Citizen Science and mutual learning. Furthermore, we will conclude by focusing on the opportunities resulting from the integration of societal expectations in science and vice versa.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/rio.9.e85860

Authors: Felicitas Kruschick, Kerstin Schoch

Abstract: Knowledge equity is a broad concept. Although it is linked to the goals of Open Science, it is rarely discussed in the scientific community. The term refers to a variety of aspects such as epistemology, research methods, data analysis, inclusive education, equal representation, participation, and science communication. It is reflected on individual, institutional, and structural levels.In this article, we attempt to outline the field theoretically against the background of a power-theoretical perspective and discuss what knowledge is in the first place. In a second step, we explore the question of what is hidden behind the terms equality and equity and to what extent these concepts can be linked to the underlying concept of knowledge. When can we speak of equity, why, and to what extent? Finally, the article links the overall social development of increasing sensitivity to diversity, which is discussed in conjunction with inclusive education and inclusion in general. Herein we refer to concepts of intersectional feminist research, the principles of Open Science, and a critical perspective on the concept of diversity.For illustration, exemplary projects associated with the Open Science Fellow Program, which address the issue of marginalized groups in the research process, are described. Among others, these relate to the following focal points: Data collection of non-binary gender, awareness of adultism, collaborative interpretation with interviewees, queer narratives, diversity in editorial boards, research in the context of North-South relations, participatory science communication using art, and exclusion factors of science communication.The overarching question we ask in this article is the extent to which knowledge equity is relevant to marginalized groups and exclusive dynamics in terms of an inclusive rationale and how those dynamics can be identified by using critical perspectives and self-reflexive considerations.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/rio.8.e89980

Authors: Rima-Maria Rahal, Hanjo Hamann, Hilmar Brohmer, Florian Pethig

Abstract: The open and transparent documentation of scientific processes has been established as a core antecedent of free knowledge. This also holds for generating robust insights in the scope of research projects. To convince academic peers and the public, the research process must be understandable and retraceable (reproducible), and repeatable (replicable) by others, precluding the inclusion of fluke findings into the canon of insights. In this contribution, we outline what reproducibility and replicability (R&R) could mean in the scope of different disciplines and traditions of research and which significance R&R has for generating insights in these fields. We draw on projects conducted in the scope of the Wikimedia "Open Science Fellows Program" (Fellowship Freies Wissen), an interdisciplinary, long-running funding scheme for projects contributing to open research practices. We identify twelve implemented projects from different disciplines which primarily focused on R&R, and multiple additional projects also touching on R&R. From these projects, we identify patterns and synthesize them into a roadmap of how research projects can achieve R&R across different disciplines. We further outline the ground covered by these projects and propose ways forward.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/rio.8.e86384

Authors: Caroline Fischer, Simon David Hirsbrunner, Vanessa Teckentrup

Abstract: Open data offer the opportunity to economically combine data into large-scale datasets, fostering collaboration and re-use in the interest of treating researchers’ resources as well as study participants with care. Whereas advantages of utilising open data might be self-evident, the production of open datasets also challenges individual researchers. This is especially true for open data that include personal data, for which higher requirements have been legislated. Mainly building on our own experience as scholars from different research traditions (life sciences, social sciences and humanities), we describe best-practice approaches for opening up research data. We reflect on common barriers and strategies to overcome them, condensed into a step-by-step guide focused on actionable advice in order to mitigate the costs and promote the benefit of open data on three levels at once: society, the disciplines and individual researchers. Our contribution may prevent researchers and research units from re-inventing the wheel when opening data and enable them to learn from our experience.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/rio.8.e86387

Authors: Isabel Steinhardt, Felicitas Kruschick

Abstract: How can Knowledge In/Equity be addressed in qualitative research by taking the idea of Open Science into account? Two projects from the Open Science Fellows Programme by Wikimedia Deutschland will be used to illustrate how Open Science practices can succeed in qualitative research, thereby reducing In/Equity. In this context, In/Equity is considered as a fair and equal representation of people, their knowledge and insights and comprehends questions about how epistemic, structural, institutional and personal biases generate and shape knowledge as guidance. Three questions guide this approach: firstly, what do we understand by In/Equity in the context of knowledge production in these projects? Secondly, who will be involved in knowledge generation and to what extent will they be valued or unvalued? Thirdly, how can data be made accessible for re-use to enable true participation and sharing?

HTML

XML

PDF