传播学学者如何看待开放学术

N. Bowman, E. M. Rinke, Eun-Ju Lee, Robin L. Nabi, Claes H. de Vreese
{"title":"传播学学者如何看待开放学术","authors":"N. Bowman, E. M. Rinke, Eun-Ju Lee, Robin L. Nabi, Claes H. de Vreese","doi":"10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":36859,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the International Communication Association","volume":"19 1","pages":"205 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How communication scholars see open scholarship\",\"authors\":\"N. Bowman, E. M. Rinke, Eun-Ju Lee, Robin L. Nabi, Claes H. de Vreese\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the International Communication Association\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"205 - 230\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the International Communication Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the International Communication Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

虽然关于传播学开放学术实践(oss)的观点在社论和立场文件中得到了注意,但作为一门学科,我们缺乏数据驱动的见解,以了解更大的社区如何理解、感受、参与和支持oss——这些见解可以为当前关于传播学开放学术实践的对话提供信息,并记录该领域如何响应当前围绕OS的持续话语而发生变化。对国际传播协会成员(N = 330)进行的一项混合方法调查表明,人们普遍熟悉和支持一些osp,但与它们的接触较少。在开放式的回答中,受访者表达了一些担忧,包括对不明确的标准的保留意见,与学术方法的假定不兼容,对滥用共享材料的恐惧,以及对围绕开放学术的有毒文化的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Four decades of biological measurement advancing mediated communication theory: a review of literature from 1980–2020 What is ‘Being There’? an ontology of the immersive experience Relational turbulence during family transitions: a lifespan perspective and roadmap for future research An enduring divide: revisiting the mass and family communication dichotomy and exploring paths of integration Mapping media literacy impact in the U.S.: a review of literature and call for equity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1