Open Science: Many Good Resolutions, Very Few Incentives, Yet

  • Sascha Friesike
  • Thomas Schildhauer


In recent years, a movement has emerged, which assembles itself under the umbrella term “Open Science”. Its intent is to make academic research more transparent, collaborative, accessible, and efficient. In the present article, we examine the origins, various forms, and understandings of this movement. Furthermore, we put the aims of individual groups associated with Open Science and the academic realities of their concepts into context. We discuss that much of what is known as Open Science can be viewed through the prism of a social dilemma. From this perspective, we explain why the concept of Open Science finds a lot of support in theory, yet struggles in practice. We conclude the article with suggestions on how to foster more Open Science in practice and how to overcome the obstacles it is currently facing.


Scientific System Page Number Individual Researcher Social Dilemma Journal System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bartling S, Friesike S (2014) Towards another scientific revolution. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science: the evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Cham, pp 3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Lipman DJ, Ostell J (2007) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 36(suppl 1):D25–D30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berners-Lee T (1989) Information management: a proposal. Accessed 20 June 2014
  4. Binswanger M (2014) Excellence by nonsense: the competition for publications. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science: the evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Cham, pp 49–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Björk B-C, Solomon D (2013) The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals. J Inform 7(4):914–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boulton G, Rawlins M, Vallance P, Walport M (2011) Science as a public enterprise: the case for open data. Lancet 377(9778):1633–1635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cranshaw J, Kittur A (2011) The polymath project: lessons from a successful online collaboration in mathematics. In: CHI’11 proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Vancouver, pp 1865–1874Google Scholar
  8. Cribb J, Sari T (2010) Open science: sharing knowledge in the global century. Csiro, CollingwoodGoogle Scholar
  9. European Commission (2008) Open access in FP7. Accessed 20 June 2014
  10. European Commission (2012) Scientific data: open access to research results will boost Europe’s innovation capacity. Accessed 20 June 2014
  11. Fecher B, Friesike S (2014) Open Science: one term, five schools of thought. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science: the evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 17–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fecher B, Friesike S, Hebing M (2014) What drives academic data sharing? SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research, No. 655, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  13. Franzoni C, Sauermann H (2014) Crowd science: the organization of scientific research in open collaborative projects. Res Policy 43(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gowers T, Nielsen M (2009) Massively collaborative mathematics. Nature 461(7266):879–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hand E (2010) Citizen science: people power. Nature 466(7307):685–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kollock P (1998) Social dilemmas. The anatomy of cooperation. Annu Rev Sociol 24(1):183–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McCullough BD (2009) Open access economics journals and the market for reproducible economic research. Econ Anal Poli 39:118–126Google Scholar
  18. Meyer ET, Schroeder R (2013) Digital transformation of scholarship and knowledge. In: Dutton WH (ed) The Oxford handbook of internet studies. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 307–327Google Scholar
  19. Nature (2006) Overview: nature’s peer review trial. Accessed 20 June 2014
  20. Neill US (2008) Publish or perish, but at what cost? J Clin Investig 118(7):2368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nielsen M (2011) Definitions of open science? Okfn mailing list. 28 July 2011
  22. Nielsen MA (2012) Reinventing discovery: the new era of networked science. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  23. NIH (2003) NIH posts research data sharing policy. Anthropol News 44:25Google Scholar
  24. Piwowar HA (2011) Who shares? Who doesn’t? Factors associated with openly archiving raw research data. PLoS ONE 6:e18657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Polymath DHJ (2010) Desity Hales-Jewett and Moser numbers. In: Bárány I, Solymosi J, Sági G (eds) An irregular mind, vol 21, Bolyai society mathematical studies. Springer, ChamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Polymath DHJ (2012) A new proof of the density Hales-Jewett theorem. Ann Math 175(3):1283–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Priem J, Taraborelli D, Groth P, Neylon C (2010) Altmetrics: a manifesto. Accessed 20 June 2014
  28. Rufai R, Gul S, Shah TA (2012) Open access journals in library and information science: the story so far. Trends Inform Manag 7(2)Google Scholar
  29. Stodden V (2009) The legal framework for reproducible scientific research: licensing and copyright. Comput Sci Eng 11(1):35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Weller K (2015) Social media and altmetrics: an overview of current alternative approaches to measuring scholarly impact. In: Welpe IM, Wollersheim J, Ringelhan S, Osterloh M (eds) Incentives and performance – governance of research organizations. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  31. Weller K, Puschmann C (2011) Twitter for scientific communication: how can citations/references be identified and measured? In: Proceedings of the ACM WebSci’11. ACM, Koblenz, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  32. WU Wien (2014) Prämien für Top-Journal-Artikel. Accessed 20 June 2014
  33. Woelfle M, Olliaro P, Todd MH (2011) Open science is a research accelerator. Nat Chem 3:745–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and SocietyBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Electronic BusinessAlexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and SocietyBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations