Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions

  1. Friederike E Kohrs
  2. Susann Auer
  3. Alexandra Bannach-Brown
  4. Susann Fiedler
  5. Tamarinde Laura Haven
  6. Verena Heise
  7. Constance Holman
  8. Flavio Azevedo
  9. René Bernard
  10. Armin Bleier
  11. Nicole Bössel
  12. Brian Patrick Cahill
  13. Leyla Jael Castro
  14. Adrian Ehrenhofer
  15. Kristina Eichel
  16. Maximillian Frank
  17. Claudia Frick
  18. Malte Friese
  19. Anne Gärtner
  20. Kerstin Gierend
  21. David Joachim Grüning
  22. Lena Hahn
  23. Maren Hülsemann
  24. Malika Ihle
  25. Sabrina Illius
  26. Laura König
  27. Matthias König
  28. Louisa Kulke
  29. Anton Kutlin
  30. Fritjof Lammers
  31. David MA Mehler
  32. Christoph Miehl
  33. Anett Müller-Alcazar
  34. Claudia Neuendorf
  35. Helen Niemeyer
  36. Florian Pargent
  37. Aaron Peikert
  38. Christina U Pfeuffer
  39. Robert Reinecke
  40. Jan Philipp Röer
  41. Jessica L Rohmann
  42. Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar
  43. Stefan Scherbaum
  44. Elena Sixtus
  45. Lisa Spitzer
  46. Vera Maren Straßburger
  47. Marcel Weber
  48. Clarissa J Whitmire
  49. Josephine Zerna
  50. Dilara Zorbek
  51. Philipp Zumstein
  52. Tracey L Weissgerber  Is a corresponding author
  1. QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
  2. Department of Plant Physiology, Faculty of Biology, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
  3. Department Strategy & Innovation, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria
  4. Danish Centre for Studies in Research & Research Policy, Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Denmark
  5. Freelance researcher, Germany
  6. Saxony Center for Criminological Research, Germany
  7. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  8. NeuroCure Cluster of Excellence, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
  9. Department for Computational Social Sciences, GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Germany
  10. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medicine Greifswald, Germany
  11. Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology, Germany
  12. ZB MED Information Centre for Life Sciences, Germany
  13. Institute of Solid Mechanics & Dresden Center for Intelligent Materials, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
  14. Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
  15. Department Psychology, LMU Munich, Germany
  16. Institute of Information Science, Technische Hochschule Köln, Germany
  17. Department of Psychology, Saarland University, Germany
  18. Department of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
  19. Department of Biomedical Informatics at the Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany
  20. Department of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Germany
  21. Department of Survey Development and Methodology, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Germany
  22. Department of Social Psychology, Universität Trier, Germany
  23. LMU Open Science Center, Department of Psychology, LMU Munich, Germany
  24. ICAN Institute for Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Human Sciences, Medical School Hamburg, Germany
  25. Faculty of Life Sciences: Food, Nutrition and Health, University of Bayreuth, Germany
  26. Institute for Biology, Institute for Theoretical Biology, Humboldt-University Berlin, Germany
  27. Developmental Psychology with Educational Psychology, University of Bremen, Germany
  28. Max Planck Institute for the Physics of Complex Systems, Germany
  29. Division of Regulatory Genomics and Cancer Evolution, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Germany
  30. Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical School, RWTH Aachen University, Germany
  31. Computation in Neural Circuits, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Germany
  32. Hector-Institute for Education Sciences and Psychology, Eberhard Karls, University of Tübingen, Germany
  33. Center for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Germany
  34. Department of Psychology, Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Germany
  35. Institute of Geography, Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Germany
  36. Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, Germany
  37. Scientific Directorate, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association (MDC), Germany
  38. Department of Evolutionary Biology, Bielefeld University, Germany
  39. Empirical Childhood Research, University of Potsdam, Germany
  40. Leibniz Institute for Psychology, Germany
  41. Department of Psychology, Medical School Hamburg, Germany
  42. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Gender in Medicine (GiM), Germany
  43. Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association, Germany
  44. Neuroscience Research Center, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
  45. International Graduate Program Medical Neurosciences, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
  46. Open Science Office, University of Mannheim, Germany
2 figures and 1 additional file

Figures

Eleven strategies for making reproducible research & open science training the norm at research institutions.

The eleven strategies are concentrated in three areas: (1) adapting research assessment criteria and program requirements (cyan), (2) offering training (purple), and (3) building communities (yellow). While Strategy 11 is part of the ‘build communities’ category, it is placed at the center to highlight the importance of building connections with others working on strategies in other areas. Institutions can support those working on the eleven strategies by allocating resources and monitoring impact. These activities are shown as two blue rings encircling the eleven strategies. (A). The small multiples (small versions of the main graph) highlight the strategies that different stakeholders can directly use at their institutions. The text below describes opportunities for different stakeholder groups to amplify or support the efforts of those working on other strategies (B). While the roles are briefly defined below, these general definitions may vary by country, field or institution. The figure provides a high-level overview; however, the strategies that are most relevant to a particular individual may diverge from what is shown depending on his or her specific responsibilities and activities. Many individuals fulfill multiple roles. Definition of roles: Instructors include researchers and other staff who teach courses or provide hands-on training. Researchers include more established scientists, early career researchers (ECRs), research trainees and others who design and conduct research studies. Supervisors provide guidance and advice on the student’s research activities, but also take part in the examination and evaluation of the student’s progress and performance. Mentors support the career development of less experienced researchers by meeting regularly with mentees to share advice, perspectives, and skills. Curriculum committee members serve on committees that design and/or approve curriculum for degree programs. Hiring and evaluation committee members serve on committees that hire, assess or promote researchers. Institutional leadership includes those in high-level positions who set priorities and establish policies for the institution (e.g. dean, provost, department chair). Research support or administrative staff may include librarians, information technology professionals, data stewards, core facility staff, open science officers, staff working with regulatory committees (e.g., ethics committees or institutional animal care and use committees), and others who support researchers. Abbreviations: RepRes, reproducible research; OS, open science.

How to provide hands-on training for reproducible research and open science practices.

The figure illustrates important points to consider before, during and after the training. Feedback and lessons learned from each training should be used to improve the next training session.

Additional files

Supplementary file 1

Event format and tips for implementing strategies (1–3, 5, 7 9–11).

https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/89736/elife-89736-supp1-v1.docx

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Friederike E Kohrs
  2. Susann Auer
  3. Alexandra Bannach-Brown
  4. Susann Fiedler
  5. Tamarinde Laura Haven
  6. Verena Heise
  7. Constance Holman
  8. Flavio Azevedo
  9. René Bernard
  10. Armin Bleier
  11. Nicole Bössel
  12. Brian Patrick Cahill
  13. Leyla Jael Castro
  14. Adrian Ehrenhofer
  15. Kristina Eichel
  16. Maximillian Frank
  17. Claudia Frick
  18. Malte Friese
  19. Anne Gärtner
  20. Kerstin Gierend
  21. David Joachim Grüning
  22. Lena Hahn
  23. Maren Hülsemann
  24. Malika Ihle
  25. Sabrina Illius
  26. Laura König
  27. Matthias König
  28. Louisa Kulke
  29. Anton Kutlin
  30. Fritjof Lammers
  31. David MA Mehler
  32. Christoph Miehl
  33. Anett Müller-Alcazar
  34. Claudia Neuendorf
  35. Helen Niemeyer
  36. Florian Pargent
  37. Aaron Peikert
  38. Christina U Pfeuffer
  39. Robert Reinecke
  40. Jan Philipp Röer
  41. Jessica L Rohmann
  42. Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar
  43. Stefan Scherbaum
  44. Elena Sixtus
  45. Lisa Spitzer
  46. Vera Maren Straßburger
  47. Marcel Weber
  48. Clarissa J Whitmire
  49. Josephine Zerna
  50. Dilara Zorbek
  51. Philipp Zumstein
  52. Tracey L Weissgerber
(2023)
Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions
eLife 12:e89736.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.89736