Difference between revisions of "Instruction:7c159fc9-db27-4623-9432-9c37b8889f89"
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
The consortium from Georgia, comprises three researchers from different institutions: the Department of Human Anatomy at Tbilisi State Medical University ([https://tsmu.edu/ts/home TSMU]), the Faculty of Medicine at Tbilisi State University ([https://www.tsu.ge/en TSU]), the Institute of Morphology, and the Scientific Department at Caucasus International University ([https://ciu.edu.ge/?lang=en CIU]). Brought together as team members of a research group, they were drafting a proposal for a Horizon Europe (HE) project when their HE grant coordinator alerted them about the TIER2 open call announcement. The team was immediately drawn to it, sharing that: | The consortium from Georgia, comprises three researchers from different institutions: the Department of Human Anatomy at Tbilisi State Medical University ([https://tsmu.edu/ts/home TSMU]), the Faculty of Medicine at Tbilisi State University ([https://www.tsu.ge/en TSU]), the Institute of Morphology, and the Scientific Department at Caucasus International University ([https://ciu.edu.ge/?lang=en CIU]). Brought together as team members of a research group, they were drafting a proposal for a Horizon Europe (HE) project when their HE grant coordinator alerted them about the TIER2 open call announcement. The team was immediately drawn to it, sharing that: | ||
| − | “''During our individual and collective research endeavors, we frequently encountered challenges in reproducing experiment results, a phenomenon that was not isolated to our work but across the global research landscape. [...] a consolidated effort was needed to elevate the state of research in our nation. [...] Moreover, the opportunity to foster a Reproducibility Network (RN) in Georgia provided a platform to unite our nation's fragmented research endeavors, drive standards in research methodologies, and integrate with the global scientific community''”. Regarding their short-term plans after receiving the award, they list the following: “''Organize the foundational meeting, bringing together stakeholders from various Georgian research institutions, to lay down the operational blueprint for the RN; Launch training sessions that cover core skills in reproducibility, data management, and research design; Conduct sessions in universities and community centers to educate and foster trust in scientific research: Set up an official RN website and leverage social media for real-time updates and engagements”. In the long term, the team envisions to “Establish partnerships with International Reproducibility Networks, facilitating knowledge exchange and joint research projects and collaborate with Georgian institutions to advocate for policies emphasizing reproducibility and transparency''”. Their global vision for the state of reproducibility and scientific integrity “''is one where every piece of research, irrespective of its domain or geography, stands the test of time and validation. We envision a scientific landscape where collaboration, transparency, and inclusivity aren't just ideals but are deeply integrated into research methodologies''.” | + | “''During our individual and collective research endeavors, we frequently encountered challenges in reproducing experiment results, a phenomenon that was not isolated to our work but across the global research landscape. [...] a consolidated effort was needed to elevate the state of research in our nation. [...] Moreover, the opportunity to foster a Reproducibility Network (RN) in Georgia provided a platform to unite our nation's fragmented research endeavors, drive standards in research methodologies, and integrate with the global scientific community''”. |
| + | |||
| + | Regarding their short-term plans after receiving the award, they list the following: “''Organize the foundational meeting, bringing together stakeholders from various Georgian research institutions, to lay down the operational blueprint for the RN; Launch training sessions that cover core skills in reproducibility, data management, and research design; Conduct sessions in universities and community centers to educate and foster trust in scientific research: Set up an official RN website and leverage social media for real-time updates and engagements”.'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''In the long term, the team envisions to “Establish partnerships with International Reproducibility Networks, facilitating knowledge exchange and joint research projects and collaborate with Georgian institutions to advocate for policies emphasizing reproducibility and transparency''”. Their global vision for the state of reproducibility and scientific integrity “''is one where every piece of research, irrespective of its domain or geography, stands the test of time and validation. We envision a scientific landscape where collaboration, transparency, and inclusivity aren't just ideals but are deeply integrated into research methodologies''.” | ||
They share that the way forward is to prioritize | They share that the way forward is to prioritize | ||
| Line 80: | Line 84: | ||
''If we could change one thing, it would be the isolated nature of scientific endeavors prevalent in many regions, like Georgia. We would foster a globally interconnected research network where findings, methodologies, and tools are shared seamlessly, accelerating scientific progress and ensuring its robustness''”. | ''If we could change one thing, it would be the isolated nature of scientific endeavors prevalent in many regions, like Georgia. We would foster a globally interconnected research network where findings, methodologies, and tools are shared seamlessly, accelerating scientific progress and ensuring its robustness''”. | ||
| − | Lastly, the Georgian consortium highlights what they would change in the global reproducibility landscape if they could: “''1)Revise Academic Incentives: The current "publish or perish" culture sometimes prioritizes quantity over quality. We'd advocate for a system where researchers are rewarded for the reproducibility and integrity of their work, not just the volume. 2)Enhanced Training: Incorporate reproducibility and Open Science training at early academic stages, ensuring that upcoming researchers are well-equipped with the necessary skills and ethos. 3)Global Collaboration Platforms: Creation of digital platforms that facilitate global collaboration, data sharing, and mutual validation of research findings, breaking down silos and fostering a truly global scientific community''.” | + | Lastly, the Georgian consortium highlights what they would change in the global reproducibility landscape if they could: |
| + | |||
| + | “''1)Revise Academic Incentives: The current "publish or perish" culture sometimes prioritizes quantity over quality. We'd advocate for a system where researchers are rewarded for the reproducibility and integrity of their work, not just the volume. 2)Enhanced Training: Incorporate reproducibility and Open Science training at early academic stages, ensuring that upcoming researchers are well-equipped with the necessary skills and ethos. 3)Global Collaboration Platforms: Creation of digital platforms that facilitate global collaboration, data sharing, and mutual validation of research findings, breaking down silos and fostering a truly global scientific community''.” | ||
| Line 107: | Line 113: | ||
<span lang="EN-US">– Matija Zlatar on behalf of the Serbian consortium</span> | <span lang="EN-US">– Matija Zlatar on behalf of the Serbian consortium</span> | ||
| − | === Resources to set up a Reproducibility Network === | + | ===Resources to set up a Reproducibility Network=== |
| − | * [https://osf.io/ndwsj Application template] | + | *[https://osf.io/ndwsj Application template] |
| − | * [https://osf.io/tsmxh Reviewer guidelines] | + | *[https://osf.io/tsmxh Reviewer guidelines] |
==='''<span lang="EN-GB">Call to action – what could you do?</span>'''=== | ==='''<span lang="EN-GB">Call to action – what could you do?</span>'''=== | ||
| Line 129: | Line 135: | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=Stakeholder communities | |Instruction Step Title=Stakeholder communities | ||
| − | |Instruction Step Text===Why build communities and engage stakeholders?== | + | |Instruction Step Text====Why build communities and engage stakeholders?=== |
<div> | <div> | ||
<span lang="EN-GB">TIER2 actively engages with researchers from different research areas (social, life, and computer sciences) and two cross-disciplinary stakeholder groups (funders and publishers) to enhance reproducibility across contexts.</span> | <span lang="EN-GB">TIER2 actively engages with researchers from different research areas (social, life, and computer sciences) and two cross-disciplinary stakeholder groups (funders and publishers) to enhance reproducibility across contexts.</span> | ||
| Line 137: | Line 143: | ||
<span lang="EN-GB">We are emphasizing our stakeholder engagement and collaboration especially during the selection, prioritization, development, implementation, and evaluation phases of our new reproducibility-related tools and practices, designed within out eight pilot activities. Through co-creation activities, we explore opportunities for closer collaboration within and across stakeholder communities and facilitate the sharing of resources and expertise. By fostering a sense of ownership and involvement, we ensure that the new tools and practices, created within the project, are valuable and useful to the communities as well as beneficial to all parties involved.</span> | <span lang="EN-GB">We are emphasizing our stakeholder engagement and collaboration especially during the selection, prioritization, development, implementation, and evaluation phases of our new reproducibility-related tools and practices, designed within out eight pilot activities. Through co-creation activities, we explore opportunities for closer collaboration within and across stakeholder communities and facilitate the sharing of resources and expertise. By fostering a sense of ownership and involvement, we ensure that the new tools and practices, created within the project, are valuable and useful to the communities as well as beneficial to all parties involved.</span> | ||
| − | + | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| − | === <span lang="EN-US">Resources to plan and conduct open and inclusive co-creation activities:</span> === | + | ===<span lang="EN-US">Resources to plan and conduct open and inclusive co-creation activities:</span>=== |
| − | * [https://osf.io/7zpyd/files/hyf9z Types of co-creation events] | + | *[https://osf.io/7zpyd/files/hyf9z Types of co-creation events] |
| − | * [https://osf.io/7zpyd/files/sy3za DEIA resources for virtual co-creation events] | + | *[https://osf.io/7zpyd/files/sy3za DEIA resources for virtual co-creation events] |
[[File:TIER2 Stakeholder Communities.jpg|thumb|Infographic illustrating the stakeholder communities and the activities they are involved with within TIER2.]] | [[File:TIER2 Stakeholder Communities.jpg|thumb|Infographic illustrating the stakeholder communities and the activities they are involved with within TIER2.]] | ||
| Line 151: | Line 157: | ||
|Instruction Step Title=Primers Inititative | |Instruction Step Title=Primers Inititative | ||
|Instruction Step Text=<span lang="EN-US">The primer initiative from the United Kingdom Reproducibility Network was designed introduce a broad audience to important topics and aspects of open and reproducible scholarship. Each primer is a 3-to-4-page summary document which describes the open or reproducible research practice, why one might be interested in it, and how they can be applied or adopted with thorough guidance.</span> | |Instruction Step Text=<span lang="EN-US">The primer initiative from the United Kingdom Reproducibility Network was designed introduce a broad audience to important topics and aspects of open and reproducible scholarship. Each primer is a 3-to-4-page summary document which describes the open or reproducible research practice, why one might be interested in it, and how they can be applied or adopted with thorough guidance.</span> | ||
| + | |||
More information on the Primers Initative can be found here: <u>[https://www.ukrn.org/primers/ <span lang="EN-US">https://www.ukrn.org/primers/</span>]</u> . | More information on the Primers Initative can be found here: <u>[https://www.ukrn.org/primers/ <span lang="EN-US">https://www.ukrn.org/primers/</span>]</u> . | ||
Latest revision as of 11:53, 17 November 2025
ModulesCommunities and collaborators
Reproducibility Network Award
What is a Reproducibility Network?
A national Reproducibility Network (RN) is a countrywide peer-led consortium that aims to improve research practices by promoting, supporting, and investigating factors contributing to robust research including, but not limited to, reproducibility, replicability, and Open Science. Activities may include promoting training activities, disseminating best practices, supporting research on reproducible research practices, and advocacy for reproducible and open research.
An RN typically serves as a hub to connect researchers to exchange ideas and good practices, promoting collaboration among researchers from a range of scientific disciplines. These networks provide infrastructure, facilitate opportunities for researchers and initiatives to support and amplify each other’s efforts, and foster community building as well as shared problem solving.
RNs can serve as connectors to other stakeholder groups such as universities, funders, or academic publishers.
Benefits for setting up an Reproducibility Network?
By providing seed funding for the establishment of a new RN, you actively contribute to the strengthening of reproducibility and Open Science in your local ecosystem. The widespread presence of RNs is crucial, as they function as points of contact for scientific communities who, across e.g., disciplinary, demographic, and geographic contexts, face different challenges and barriers. RNs can provide local and tailored support and keep in mind the different stages of readiness of their local communities for implementing reproducible research practices.
"Lessons learned" from the TIER2 award
1. Build strong community links. Involve already existing and successful RNs in the establishment of new RNs. This ensures that new RNs receive valuable guidance, input and support early in the establishment process.
2. Expand connections and broaden the reach. Reach out to researchers and other relevant stakeholders, such as universities, as this is important for local support and the sustainability of the RN. However, identifying and connecting with researchers in Horizon Europe Widening Participation countries (WIDERA countries) who are active in reproducible research and Open Science practices can be challenging.
3. Facilitate international support. Several RNs across the globe exist and more are being established. Build strong international connections amongst them to facilitate the sharing of resources and best practices, this will help to coordinate and amplify efforts.
4. Focus on the local ecosystem. RNs are national networks that promote transparent and trustworthy practices in their local research ecosystems. Recognize local needs, geopolitical conditions as well as barriers and available resources.
How has TIER2 supported the awarded networks?
1. TIER2 members and award organizers have facilitated connections between awardees and existing international Reproducibility and Open Science networks. via email contacts as well as through virtual and in-person meetings.
2. TIER2 award organizers, have added awardees, with their consent, to various mailing lists and newsletters from different international RNs.
3.Further, TIER2 award organizers have invited awardees to attend and speak at several Open Science and reproducibility events to meet (steering group) members from other RNs and (inter-)national initiatives.
4. TIER2 project members as well as award organizers have provided the awardees with resources and information on relevant topics, including different RN structures, website layout and structure, as well as language.
Awardess of the TIER2 Reproducibility Network Award
TIER2 is proud to announce the two awarded consortia based in Ukraine and Georgia who will receive the monetary awards from the Reproducibility Network open call this summer. Multiple scientific consortia from Horizon Europe “Widening Participation” countries submitted applications describing their plans and motivations for establishing a Reproducibility Network in their home country which TIER2 would support with a €5000 prize.
Ukrainian Consortium
The Ukrainian consortium, from the Institute for Open Science and Innovation (INOSI), OPTIMA Project Consortium & Lviv Polytechnic National University, comprises researchers with a broad scientific background, ranging from informatics to chemistry and ecology. The core of the consortium has already experience working together in promoting Open Science in Ukraine, particularly within the OPTIMA project and within the Working Group on the National Plan for Open Science development in Ukraine. In response to what motivated them in participating in the open call, they state that: “Ukraine needs good science to make good decisions in all spheres. This is particularly relevant during the war and will be needed for the post-war recovery. Reproducibility (as a part of the Open Science concept) can boost the value of academic research in Ukraine making science a real game-changer for progress”. Regarding their future plans for the Ukrainian Reproducibility Network, they share: “In the short term, the ambition is to kickstart the network of experts, able to lead the discussion on reproducibility and become a role model on the national level. In the long term, the ambition is, of course, to make reproducibility in research a standard by default. This has to be supported by co-creation and sharing best practices, research on research, and making an impact on national policy. We hope that the network will be viable and ambitious enough to compete for international grant funding to achieve this”. With regard to the global state of reproducibility & scientific integrity, they say: “The progress on the global level is visible, but it's only the beginning of a long way forward. The key to achieving the goal is a strong research culture that is often missing in many academic communities. Openness and transparency in performing and communicating research are the basic things to be established.”
Georgian Consortium
The consortium from Georgia, comprises three researchers from different institutions: the Department of Human Anatomy at Tbilisi State Medical University (TSMU), the Faculty of Medicine at Tbilisi State University (TSU), the Institute of Morphology, and the Scientific Department at Caucasus International University (CIU). Brought together as team members of a research group, they were drafting a proposal for a Horizon Europe (HE) project when their HE grant coordinator alerted them about the TIER2 open call announcement. The team was immediately drawn to it, sharing that:
“During our individual and collective research endeavors, we frequently encountered challenges in reproducing experiment results, a phenomenon that was not isolated to our work but across the global research landscape. [...] a consolidated effort was needed to elevate the state of research in our nation. [...] Moreover, the opportunity to foster a Reproducibility Network (RN) in Georgia provided a platform to unite our nation's fragmented research endeavors, drive standards in research methodologies, and integrate with the global scientific community”.
Regarding their short-term plans after receiving the award, they list the following: “Organize the foundational meeting, bringing together stakeholders from various Georgian research institutions, to lay down the operational blueprint for the RN; Launch training sessions that cover core skills in reproducibility, data management, and research design; Conduct sessions in universities and community centers to educate and foster trust in scientific research: Set up an official RN website and leverage social media for real-time updates and engagements”.
In the long term, the team envisions to “Establish partnerships with International Reproducibility Networks, facilitating knowledge exchange and joint research projects and collaborate with Georgian institutions to advocate for policies emphasizing reproducibility and transparency”. Their global vision for the state of reproducibility and scientific integrity “is one where every piece of research, irrespective of its domain or geography, stands the test of time and validation. We envision a scientific landscape where collaboration, transparency, and inclusivity aren't just ideals but are deeply integrated into research methodologies.”
They share that the way forward is to prioritize
“1)Education & Training: Equip researchers, especially the younger generation, with the necessary tools and knowledge to ensure reproducibility.
2)Open Science: Promote Open Access publications, making research universally accessible and subject to broader scrutiny.
3)Interdisciplinary Collaborations: Foster collaborations across disciplines, pooling expertise and resources to tackle complex research challenges.
4)Technological Integration: Leverage technology, especially AI and data analytics, to aid in ensuring research consistency and integrity.
If we could change one thing, it would be the isolated nature of scientific endeavors prevalent in many regions, like Georgia. We would foster a globally interconnected research network where findings, methodologies, and tools are shared seamlessly, accelerating scientific progress and ensuring its robustness”.
Lastly, the Georgian consortium highlights what they would change in the global reproducibility landscape if they could:
“1)Revise Academic Incentives: The current "publish or perish" culture sometimes prioritizes quantity over quality. We'd advocate for a system where researchers are rewarded for the reproducibility and integrity of their work, not just the volume. 2)Enhanced Training: Incorporate reproducibility and Open Science training at early academic stages, ensuring that upcoming researchers are well-equipped with the necessary skills and ethos. 3)Global Collaboration Platforms: Creation of digital platforms that facilitate global collaboration, data sharing, and mutual validation of research findings, breaking down silos and fostering a truly global scientific community.”
Serbian Consortium
TIER2 is excited to announce the winner of the 2024 Open Call aimed at fostering the establishment of a third Reproducibility Network (RN) in “Widening Participation” countries - Serbia. The goal of Reproducibility Networks is to promote rigorous research practices, facilitate interdisciplinary collaborations and discussions, and enhance the trustworthiness of scientific work. The Serbian consortium will thus receive a €5,000 grant to organise an initial meeting, laying the groundwork for establishing an RN in their country.
The Serbian consortium, consisting of nine organisations – six institutes and three faculties –, brings together diverse academic backgrounds with a shared commitment to improving research culture in Serbia. They focus on integrating Open Science, reproducibility, and inclusive policies into institutions and education. The consortium has previously collaborated on initiatives like the Team for Open Science in Serbia and the Saige project, organising workshops and training to promote open science practices.
Motivated by challenges such as low research investment and a scientific system that prioritises quantity over quality, they believe establishing a Reproducibility Network will enhance collaboration and help to address these issues. In the short term, they plan to promote the network through conferences, a kick-off event, and online platforms. Long-term, they aim to integrate Open Science into curricula, incentivise reproducibility, support initiatives beyond major centers, advocate for policy changes, and build international collaborations.
Their vision for global reproducibility is one where research is transparent, ethical, and rigorous:
“In this ideal state, researchers across all disciplines adhere to principles of Open Science, ensuring that their methods, data, and results are accessible and reproducible.”
– Matija Zlatar on behalf of the Serbian consortium
They advocate for integrating these principles into education, establishing incentive systems, and fostering collaboration:
“We should integrate reproducibility and Open Science practices into university curricula and professional development programs to equip researchers with the necessary skills and knowledge to conduct reproducible research.”
– Matija Zlatar on behalf of the Serbian consortium
Resources to set up a Reproducibility Network
Call to action – what could you do?
- Are you a researcher? Join an existing RN in your country or, if none exist, identify supporters and form your own network.
- Are you a funder? Offer your support by providing (additional) funding for personnel costs, events on reproducibility practices and Open Science, or training opportunities. Further, establish your own award calls to support the establishment of more RNs.
- Are you a publisher? Support the wide range of outputs generated by RNs, for example via special issues or journals, to help them increase their reach.
Not sure, if your country has an established Reproducibility Network?
Visit the Global Networks page hosted by the UKRN to find out if a Reproducibility Network already exists in your country: https://www.ukrn.org/global-networks/.Stakeholder communities
===Why build communities and engage stakeholders?===
TIER2 actively engages with researchers from different research areas (social, life, and computer sciences) and two cross-disciplinary stakeholder groups (funders and publishers) to enhance reproducibility across contexts.
Through our co-creation and engagement activities, we are actively fostering communication within and across stakeholder groups creating communities of practices. Opportunities for knowledge exchange and sharing of perspectives further enhances our TIER2 community building efforts
We are emphasizing our stakeholder engagement and collaboration especially during the selection, prioritization, development, implementation, and evaluation phases of our new reproducibility-related tools and practices, designed within out eight pilot activities. Through co-creation activities, we explore opportunities for closer collaboration within and across stakeholder communities and facilitate the sharing of resources and expertise. By fostering a sense of ownership and involvement, we ensure that the new tools and practices, created within the project, are valuable and useful to the communities as well as beneficial to all parties involved.
Resources to plan and conduct open and inclusive co-creation activities:
Primers Inititative
The primer initiative from the United Kingdom Reproducibility Network was designed introduce a broad audience to important topics and aspects of open and reproducible scholarship. Each primer is a 3-to-4-page summary document which describes the open or reproducible research practice, why one might be interested in it, and how they can be applied or adopted with thorough guidance.
Consortia Partners
TIER2 brings a unique combination of skills and perspectives, consisting of eleven partners from seven countries, well spread across Europe. The partner organisations all bring a wealth of expertise and experience regarding the target communities (computer science, life science, social science), research culture reform, technical aspects of infrastructure and services, as well as expertise in social sciences and humanities, and gender aspects of R&I.
iRise
iRise aims to deepen understanding of reproducibility drivers, evaluate their effectiveness and provide concrete solutions to enhance scientific evidence.
Their direct objectives are:
- Develop working definitions and a general framework for diagnosing and addressing reproducibility problems, define costs, benefits and opportunities, and assess the utility of theoretical evidence in forecasting the success of interventions.
- Perform scoping and systematic reviews to identify and evaluate existing interventions to improve reproducibility.
- Explore the interface between reproducibility and research culture, and in particular considerations and mainstreaming of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI).
- Consult and engage key stakeholder groups in prioritising practices and practical tool development for adoption to increase reproducibility.
- Test efficacy and feasibility of specific interventions to increase reproducibility.
