Open Science Practices Used by Colombian Researchers of the Humanities Field

被引:0
作者
Vallejo-Sierra, Ruth Helena [1 ]
Pirela-Morillo, Johann Enrique [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Distrital Francisco Jose de Caldas, Programa Archivist & Gest Informac Digital, Bogota, Colombia
来源
INVESTIGACION BIBLIOTECOLOGICA | 2024年 / 38卷 / 100期
关键词
Open Science; Open Scientific Knowl- edge; Social Agents Open Participation; Open Dia- logue with Other Knowledge Systems;
D O I
10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2024.100.58888
中图分类号
G25 [图书馆学、图书馆事业]; G35 [情报学、情报工作];
学科分类号
1205 ; 120501 ;
摘要
This article analyzes the predominant open science practices in Colombian humanistic institutions most recurred by researchers, under the premise that this way of doing science encompasses the sense of knowledge as a common good. A questionnaire was designed and answered by 173 researchers of the humanities field; results highlight that the most used practices of open participation by different social actors are the exchange and co -creation between researchers and citizens for research project development (46 %) and the recognition of participation and contribution of social actors in research results (44 %). In the open dialogue with other knowledge systems, results featured the valuing of ancestral and traditional knowledge of Indigenous, Black, Afro -Colombian, Raizal, Palenquero, Rom, peasant and local communities (40 %), as well as for their knowledge systems (30 %). Further, there were no obstacles perceived for open science implementation. In conclusion, the article endorses competency strengthening in this group of researchers for a much more situated and intentional use of technology, guided by the principles of open knowledge, collaboration and inclusion.
引用
收藏
页码:107 / 122
页数:16
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]   OPEN SCIENCE: EVOLUTION OF THE NAME AND THE CONCEPT [J].
Abadal Falgueras, Ernest ;
Anglada Ferrer, Lluis .
ANALES DE DOCUMENTACION, 2020, 23 (01)
[2]  
Anglada L, 2018, Anuario ThinkEPI, V12, P292, DOI [10.3145/thinkepi.2018.43, 10.3145/thinkepi.2018.43, DOI 10.3145/THINKEPI.2018.43]
[3]  
Bartling S., 2014, Opening Science, P3, DOI [10.1007/978-3-319-00026-81, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-00026-81, 10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_1, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_1, 10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8]
[4]   A Layered Framework for Considering Open Science Practices [J].
Bowman, Nicholas David ;
Keene, Justin Robert .
COMMUNICATION RESEARCH REPORTS, 2018, 35 (04) :363-372
[5]   Public repositories against the commodification of Science: betting on open science and qualitative evaluation [J].
Caldera-Serrano, Jorge .
METODOS DE INFORMACION, 2018, 9 (17) :74-101
[6]  
Gezelter Dan, 2011, The OpenScience Project (blog) 28 de julio de
[7]   The UK e-science core programme and the grid [J].
Hey, T ;
Trefethen, AE .
FUTURE GENERATION COMPUTER SYSTEMS, 2002, 18 (08) :1017-1031
[8]  
Masuzzo P., 2017, PEERJ PREPRINTS, V5, DOI [DOI 10.7287/PEERJ.PREPRINTS.2689V1, 10.7287/peerj. preprints.2689v1]
[9]   OPEN SCIENCE BY DEFAULT. THE "NEW NORMAL" FOR RESEARCH [J].
Mendez, Eva .
ARBOR-CIENCIA PENSAMIENTO Y CULTURA, 2021, 197 (799)
[10]  
Merton R.K., 1968, SOCIAL STRUCTURE SOC