@article{8e2a1a07cc304dcd9b0a2fc069065890,
title = "How communication scholars see open scholarship",
abstract = "While perspectives on open scholarship practices (OSPs) in Communication are noted in editorials and position papers, as a discipline we lack data-driven insights into how the larger community understands, feels about, engages in, and supports OSPs–insights that could inform current conversations about OSPs in Communication and document how the field shifts in response to ongoing discourses around OS in the current moment. A mixed-methodological survey of International Communication Association members (N = 330) suggested widespread familiarity with and support for some OSPs, but less engagement with them. In open-ended responses, respondents expressed several concerns, including reservations about unclear standards, presumed incompatibility with scholarly approaches, fears of a misuse of shared materials, and perceptions of a toxic culture surrounding open scholarship.",
keywords = "#opencomm, Open scholarship, metascience, mixed methods, open data, open science",
author = "Bowman, {Nicholas David} and Rinke, {Eike Mark} and Lee, {Eun Ju} and Robin Nabi and {de Vreese}, {Claes H.}",
note = "Funding Information: Conversations about OSPs have intensified in recent years, and a growing number of associations and journals in Communication have already begun incorporating OSPs, from the use of Open Science Badges (e.g. the ICA 2021 program and in many ICA journals) to more direct support for supplemental material (e.g. Open Science Framework content), with some journals and ICA submissions accepting pre-registered report submissions. Accompanying these efforts are numerous conference panel discussions and published journal editorials speaking to the perceived risks and benefits various OSPs. However, lacking in these panels and editorials are data broadly sampled from Communication scholars regarding field-level patterns of knowledge of, engagement with, attitudes towards, and support for OSPs. Our project is an attempt to provide such data, sampling of just over 10% of the registered membership of ICA representative of a variety of career stages, epistemologies, and methodologies in Communication scholarship. These data come at an especially important time when we consider that funding agencies and even some universities have already taken steps towards making OSPs mandatory. For example, projects funded by Horizon Europe, which makes use of European Union funding, mandate that research be {\textquoteleft}made immediately available through Open Access Repositories without embargo{\textquoteright} (European Science Foundation, , para. 3; also see European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, ), and a Dutch consortium of funding agencies, universities, and research agencies has worked actively towards a {\textquoteleft}cultural change{\textquoteright} in encouraging the universal adoption of OSPs (National Programme Open Science, , para. 7). Already reflecting some of the findings of our survey, these actions have not been accepted unconditionally, with de Knecht () and Neff () especially critical of OSP mandates that might further empower for-profit publishing companies. For example, Plan S publishing mandates that require Dutch funded research to be published open access generate over €16 million in open access fees for the publisher Elsevier (see Neff, ). Although these discussions center mostly on open access concerns, they foretell debates regarding tensions around mandatory OSPs, such as those reported in our own data. Funding Information: The authors sincerely thank Tom Mankowski and Julie Arnold of the International Communication Association for their assistance with the data collection for this project, and ICA Executive Director Laura Sawyer Dhokai for ICA{\textquoteright}s support of this research. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.",
year = "2022",
doi = "10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "205--230",
journal = "Annals of the International Communication Association",
issn = "2380-8985",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",
}