Abstract

Recent years have introduced major shifts in scientific reporting and publishing. The scientific community, publishers, funding agencies, and the public expect research to adhere to principles of openness, reproducibility, replicability, and repeatability. However, studies have shown that scientists often have neither the right tools nor suitable support at their disposal to meet these modern science challenges. In fact, even the concrete expectations connected to these terms may be unclear and subject to field-specific, organizational, and personal interpretations. Based on a narrative literature review of work that defines characteristics of open science, reproducibility, replicability, and repeatability, as well as a review of recent work on researcher-centered requirements, we find that the bottom-up practices and needs of researchers contrast top-down expectations encoded in terms related to reproducibility and open science. We identify and define reproducibility as a central term that concerns the ease of access to scientific resources, as well as their completeness, to the degree required for efficiently and effectively interacting with scientific work. We hope that this characterization helps to create a mutual understanding across science stakeholders, in turn paving the way for suitable and stimulating environments, fit to address the challenges of modern science reporting and publishing.

Highlights

  • Reproducibility is widely recognized as a cornerstone of modern science that is expected to enable the validation and reuse of published findings

  • In order to derive such a definition and to introduce the researcher-centered perspective, we report on a narrative literature review that we conducted within two distinct scopes: (1) current terminologies around open science, reproducibility, replicability, and related terms; and (2) human–computer interaction (HCI) research exploring and supporting open and reproducible science practices

  • We reported on our narrative literature review that focused on common open and reproducible science terminologies as well as HCI research on open and reproducible science practices

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Reproducibility is widely recognized as a cornerstone of modern science that is expected to enable the validation and reuse of published findings. The term reproducibility is closely connected to related calls for open science, repeatability, reusability, and replicability These terms are not standardized [1], are used interchangeably, carry different meanings across scientific fields, or imply questionable dependencies [2], in turn adding to the complexity of supporting and conducting responsible modern research. We argue that the ambiguity of the definitions and interpretations around responsible modern science principles increases the barriers for both researchers and support staff to conduct and facilitate science that is transparent and reusable. This is all the more problematic given the widely unresolved and far-reaching socio-technical challenges involved in the open sharing of useful scientific resources. Key issues include incentivizing and motivating researchers to openly share and document their materials [3,4], training researchers on best practices [5,6], and providing suitable technical infrastructure [7]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call