论文标题
补充材料的开放科学和作者。研究界的证据
Open Science and Authorship of Supplementary Material. Evidence from a Research Community
论文作者
论文摘要
科学文章的作者身份已经从早期科学发生了深刻的变化。虽然曾几何时是由少数作者撰写的论文,但如今,科学合作平均更为突出。根据传统的研究评估框架,由于作者身份(和引文)本质上是主要的奖励机制,因此事实证明这是一个相当热的话说主题,其中很大一部分的学术纠纷源于该主题。但是,新颖的开放科学实践可能是破坏这种动态并使参与相同研究工作不同阶段的不同科学贡献者的信用的机会。实际上,上下文发表的论文和研究数据(或软件)可能会表现出不同的作者身份,以归功于最合适的各种贡献者。作为一项初步研究,在本文中,我们利用了开放科学图中包含的大量信息,例如Openaire,并针对欧洲海洋科学(MES)研究社区的补充材料的一部分出版物进行了重点分析。结果是有希望的,表明我们的假设值得进一步探索,因为我们在参与该出版物的作者与参与补充数据集(或软件)的作者之间进行了实质性差异,因此对现象进行了纵向,大规模的分析。
Authorship of scientific articles has profoundly changed from early science until now. While once upon a time a paper was authored by a handful of authors, scientific collaborations are much more prominent on average nowadays. As authorship (and citation) is essentially the primary reward mechanism according to the traditional research evaluation frameworks, it turned out to be a rather hot-button topic from which a significant portion of academic disputes stems. However, the novel Open Science practices could be an opportunity to disrupt such dynamics and diversify the credit of the different scientific contributors involved in the diverse phases of the lifecycle of the same research effort. In fact, a paper and research data (or software) contextually published could exhibit different authorship to give credit to the various contributors right where it feels most appropriate. As a preliminary study, in this paper, we leverage the wealth of information contained in Open Science Graphs, such as OpenAIRE, and conduct a focused analysis on a subset of publications with supplementary material drawn from the European Marine Science (MES) research community. The results are promising and suggest our hypothesis is worth exploring further as we registered in 22% of the cases substantial variations between the authors participating in the publication and the authors participating in the supplementary dataset (or software), thus posing the premises for a longitudinal, large-scale analysis of the phenomenon.