Download
Share
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

The Tao of Open Science for Ecology

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 Center for Environmental Research, Education and Outreach, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
2 Environmental Science and Resource Management Program & Pacific Institute for Restoration Ecology, California State University Channel Islands, Camarillo, CA, USA
3 Marine Science Institute and Department of Earth Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA
4 Center for Limnology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
5 Center for Nanotechnology in Society, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA
6 National Ecological Observatory Network, Boulder, CO, USA
7 National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA
8 Renaissance Computing Institute, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
9 Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
10 College of University Libraries and Learning Science, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
11 The Institute of Environmental and Human Health, Department of Environmental Toxicology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA
12 Department of Earth & Environment, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
13 National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, USA
14 School of Plant Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
DOI
10.7287/peerj.preprints.549v1
Published
Accepted
Subject Areas
Ecology, Science Policy
Keywords
data management, ecology, open science, open access, reproducible research
Copyright
© 2014 Hampton et al.
Licence
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ PrePrints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
Cite this article
Hampton SE, Anderson S, Bagby SC, Gries C, Han X, Hart E, Jones MB, Lenhardt WC, MacDonald A, Michener W, Mudge JF, Pourmokhtarian A, Schildhauer M, Woo KH, Zimmerman N. 2014. The Tao of Open Science for Ecology. PeerJ PrePrints 2:e549v1

Abstract

The field of ecology is poised to take advantage of emerging technologies that facilitate the gathering, analyzing, and sharing of data, methods, and results. The concept of transparency at all stages of the research process, coupled with free and open access to data, code, and papers, constitutes "open science." Despite the many benefits of an open approach to science, a number of barriers to entry exist that may prevent researchers from embracing openness in their own work. Here we describe several key shifts in mindset that underpin the transition to more open science. These shifts in mindset include thinking about data stewardship rather than data ownership, embracing transparency throughout the data life-cycle and project duration, and accepting critique in public. Though foreign and perhaps frightening at first, these changes in thinking stand to benefit the field of ecology by fostering collegiality and broadening access to data and findings. We present an overview of tools and best practices that can enable these shifts in mindset at each stage of the research process, including tools to support data management planning and reproducible analyses, strategies for soliciting constructive feedback throughout the research process, and methods of broadening access to final research products.

Author Comment

This is a pre-print of a collaborative paper that began at the NCEAS OpenScience Codefest 2014, and has been submitted to the journal Ecosphere.

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Stephanie E Hampton wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Sean Anderson wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Sarah C Bagby wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Corinna Gries wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Xueying Han wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Edmund Hart wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Matthew B. Jones wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

W. Christopher Lenhardt wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Andrew MacDonald wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

William Michener wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Joseph F Mudge wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Afshin Pourmokhtarian wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Mark Schildhauer wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Kara H Woo wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Naupaka Zimmerman wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Funding

Much of the work on this manuscript was done at the Open Science Codefest which was supported by awards from the National Science Foundation (1216894 and 1216817) and sponsored by the Renaissance Computing Institute, the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, rOpenSci, DataONE, and Mozilla Science Lab. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies
Download
Content
Alert
Just enter your email

Download article

The Tao of Open Science for Ecology
PDF Save to Mendeley RIS XML BibTeX
1 Citation   Views   Downloads