Cumhuri̇yet’i̇n 100. Yılında Bilgi ve Belge Yönetimi Teknolojisinde Güncel Yaklaşımlar

EnglishTürkçe

BÖLÜM


DOI :10.26650/B/SS53.2024.015.37   IUP :10.26650/B/SS53.2024.015.37    Tam Metin (PDF)

“Tekrarlanabilirlik Krizi” Bağlamında Açık Bilim Girişimi ve Akademik Kütüphanelere Etkisi

Mithat Baver Zencir

Tekrarlanabilirlik, bilimsel sonuçların doğrulanması ve güvenilir bilginin oluşturulması açısından önemlidir. Tekrarlanabilirliğin sağlanması için açık ve şeffaf araştırma süreçlerinin ortaya çıkması bir gerekliliktir. Bu noktada, açık bilim girişimi kapsadığı etkinlikler ile kritik bir önem arz eder. Tekrarlanabilir ve açık araştırma kültürünün hayata geçirilmesinde kütüphaneler öncü kurumlardır. Bu çalışma, literatür incelemesine bağlı olarak; tekrarlanabilirliği, tekrarlanabilirliğin sağlanmasında açık bilimin rolünü ve akademik kütüphanelerin bu kapsamda üstlenebilecekleri görevleri ele almaktadır. Bu sayede ülkemizdeki akademik kütüphaneler ve diğer bilimsel paydaşlar için konuya ilişkin bir farkındalık oluşturulması amaçlanmaktadır. Literatür incelemesi sonucunda, kütüphane hizmetleri açısından özellikle tekrarlanabilirlik konusunun ele alınmasının nispeten yeni ve başlangıç aşamasında olduğu kanısı oluşmuştur. Buna rağmen, kütüphaneciler ve bilgi profesyonelleri için yeni uzmanlık ve becerilerin açık ve tekrarlanabilir araştırmalar bağlamında tartışıldığı görülmektedir. Konuya ilişkin çalışmaların sayısındaki artış ve uygulamaların yaygınlığı ile kütüphanecilerin olası araştırmacı gereksinimlerini karşılaması sağlanabilir. 


Anahtar Kelimeler: Tekrarlanabilirlik, tekrarlanabilirlik krizi, açık bilim, akademik kütüphaneler, bilimsel etik
DOI :10.26650/B/SS53.2024.015.37   IUP :10.26650/B/SS53.2024.015.37    Tam Metin (PDF)

The Open Science Initiative in the Context of the “Reproducibility Crisis” and Its Impact on Academic Libraries

Mithat Baver Zencir

Reproducibility is important in terms of verifying scientific results and creating reliable information. The emergence of open and transparent research processes is a requirement to ensure reproducibility. At this point, the open science initiative has a critical importance with the activities it covers. Libraries are pioneering institutions in the implementation of reproducible and open research culture. This study discusses reproducibility, the role of open science in ensuring reproducibility, and the duties that academic libraries can take on in this context, based on the literature review. In this way, it is aimed to raise awareness on the issue for academic libraries and other scientific stakeholders in Turkey. As a result of the literature review, it was concluded that the issue of reproducibility in particular is relatively new and at the initial stage in terms of library services. However, new expertise and skills for librarians and information professionals appear to be discussed in the context of open and reproducible research. With the increase in the number of studies on the topic and the prevalence of services, librarians can meet possible researcher needs.


Anahtar Kelimeler: Reproducibility, reproducibility crisis, open science, academic libraries, scientific ethics

Referanslar

  • Ataman, E., Çağlar, O. C. ve Kırkıcı, B. (2021). Dilbilim araştırmalarında açık bilim. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 32(2), 149-175. doi: 10.18492/dad.936072 google scholar
  • Ayris, P., Bernal, I., Cavalli, V., Dorch, B., Frey, J., Hallik, M., ... Horstmann, W. (2018). LIBER Open Science Roadmap. Hague: Association of European Research Libraries. doi:10.5281/zenodo.1303002 google scholar
  • Bagchi, M. (2022). Open science for an open future. Erişim adresi: https://easychair.org/publications/prep-rint/38Ks google scholar
  • Bailey, C.W. (2007). Open access and libraries. Collection Management,32(3-4), 351-383. doi: 10.1300/ J105v32n03_07 google scholar
  • Baker, L., Cristea, I. A., Errington, T. M., Jasko, K., Lusoli, W., MacCallum, C. J., . . . Winchester, C. (2020). Reproducibility of scientific results in the EU: Scoping report. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. doi:10.2777/341654 google scholar
  • Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 Scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature News, 533(7604), 452-454. do-i:10.1038/533452a google scholar
  • Begley, C. ve Ellis, L. (2012). Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature 483, 531-533. Erişim adresi: https://www.nature.com/articles/483531a google scholar
  • Benestad, R. E., Nuccitelli, D., Lewandowsky, S., Hayhoe, K., Hygen, H. O., Van Dorland, R. ve Cook, J. (2016). Learning from mistakes in climate research. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 126(3), 699-703. doi:10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5. google scholar
  • Bollen, K., Cacioppo, J.T., Kaplan, R.M., Krosnick, J.A. ve Olds. J. L. (2015). Social, behavioral, and economic sciences perspectives on robust and reliable science: Report of the subcommittee on replicability in science advisory committee to the National Science Foundation Directorate for Social. Behavioral, and Economic Sciences. Erişim adresi: https://nsf.gov/sbe/AC_Materials/SBE_Robust_and_Reliable_Research_Report.pdf google scholar
  • Borgman, C. L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the internet. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. google scholar
  • Center for Open Science (t.y). Top guidelines. Erişim adresi: https://www.cos.io/initiatives/top-guidelines google scholar
  • Chang, A. C. ve Li, P. (2015). Is economics research replicable? Sixty published papers from thirteen journals say “usually not”. Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2015-083. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Erişim adresi: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2669564 google scholar
  • Dawson, B. ve Trapp, R. G. (2004). Basic & clinical biostatistics. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical. google scholar
  • Dickersin, K. (1990). The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA., 263(10), 1385-1389. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440100097014 google scholar
  • European Commission (2022). Assessing the reproducibility of research results in EU Framework Prog-rammes for Research. Publications Office of the European Union. Erişim adresi: https://data.europa.eu/ doi/10.2777/186782 google scholar
  • European commission. (2021). The EU’s open science policy. Erişim adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/resear-ch-and-innovation/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/our-digital-future/open-science_en google scholar
  • Fanelli, D. (2010) Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US States data. PLOS ONE 5(4): e10271. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010271 google scholar
  • Federer, L. M. ve Qin, J. (2019). Beyond the data management plan: expanding roles for librarians in data science and open science. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 529-531. doi: 10.1002/pra2.82 google scholar
  • Frederick, D. E. (2021). Will preprint servers disrupt scientific publishing, reference work and information science? Library Hi Tech News, 38(6), 7-14. doi: 10.1108/LHTN-10-2021-0071 google scholar
  • Gezelter, D. (2009). What, exactly, is open science? The OpenScience Project. Erişim adresi: http://openscience. org/what-exactly-is-open-science/ google scholar
  • Giesecke, J. (2011). Institutional repositories: Keys to success. Journal of Library Administration, 51(5-6), 529-542. doi: 10.1080/01930826.2011.589340 google scholar
  • Granger, S. (2020). How research reproducibility challenges librarians’ skill sets. A French librarian’s perspec-tive. Journal for Reproducibility in Neuroscience, 2. doi:10.31885/jrn.2.2021.1450 google scholar
  • Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS medicine, 2(8), e124. Erişim adresi: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 google scholar
  • Ioannidis, J.P. (2009). Population-wide generalizability of genome-wide discovered associations. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 101(19), 1297-1299. doi:10.1093/jnci/djp298 google scholar
  • Kul, S. (2014). İstatistik sonuçlarının yorumu: p değeri ve güven aralığı nedir? Plevra Bülteni, 8(1). Erişim adresi: https://www.toraks.org.tr/site/sf/books/pre_migration/c19fa28083ae026a97e3878c26e1b03eaacfd-74d114c8d66f832d8d806c56307.pdf google scholar
  • LaPolla, F. W. Z., Bakker, C. J., Exner, N., Montnech, T., Surkis, A. ve Ye, H. (2022). Rigor and reproducibility instruction in academic medical libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 110(3), 281-293. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2022.1443 google scholar
  • Maggin, D. M. (2021). Journal editor and associate editor perspectives on research reproducibility and open science. Remedial and Special Education. doi:10.1177/07419325211017294 google scholar
  • McKay, D. (2007). Institutional repositories and their ‘other’ users: usability beyond authors. Ariadne, 52. Erişim adresi: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue52/mckay/ google scholar
  • Munafo, M. R., Chambers, C. D., Collins, A. M., Fortunato, L. ve Macleod, M. R. (2020). Research culture and reproducibility. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(2). doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.12.002 google scholar
  • Munafo, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., Du Sert, N. P., . . . Ioannidis, J. P. google scholar
  • (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1). doi:10.1038/s41562-016-0021 google scholar
  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine [NASEM]. (2019). Reproducibility and replicability in science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Erişim adresi: https://nap.nationalacademies. org/catalog/25303/reproducibility-and-replicability-in-science google scholar
  • National Science Foundation ve Institute of Education Sciences. (2018). Companion guidelines on replication & reproducibility in education research: A supplement to the common guidelines for education research and development. Alexandria, USA: National Science Foundation. Erişim adresi: https://nsf.gov/pubs/2019/ nsf19022/nsf19022.pdf google scholar
  • Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., . . . Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348(6242), 1422-1425. Erişim adresi: https://www.science. org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.aab2374 google scholar
  • Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251). Erişim adresi: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aac4716 google scholar
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2015). Making open science a reality. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/5jrs2f963zs1-en google scholar
  • Plesser, H. E. (2018). Reproducibility vs. replicability: a brief history of a confused terminology. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 11, 76. doi:10.3389/fninf.2017.00076 google scholar
  • Sayre, F. ve Riegelman, A. (2018). The reproducibility crisis and academic libraries. College and Research Libraries, 79(1), 2-9. doi:10.5860/crl.79.1.2 google scholar
  • Siontis, K. C. M., Patsopoulos, N. A. ve Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2010). Replication of past candidate loci for common diseases and phenotypes in 100 genome-wide association studies. European Journal of Human Genetics, 18(7), 832-837. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.26 google scholar
  • Stagge, J. H., Rosenberg, D. E., Abdallah, A. M., Akbar, H., Attallah, N. A. ve James, R. (2019). Assessing data availability and research reproducibility in hydrology and water resources. Scientific Data, 6(1). doi: 10.1038/sdata.2019.30. google scholar
  • Steeves, V. (2017). Reproducibility librarianship. Collaborative Librarianship 9(2): 80-89. Erişim adresi: https:// digitalcommons.du.edu/collaborativelibrarianship/vol9/iss2/4 google scholar
  • Tapfuma, M. M. ve Hoskins, R. G. (2019). Open science disrupting the status quo in academic libraries: A perspective of Zimbabwe. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 45(4), 406-412. doi:10.1016/j.aca-lib.2019.05.005 google scholar
  • The Economist (2013). How science goes wrong. Erişim adresi: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2013/10/21/ how-science-goes-wrong google scholar
  • The Turing Way Community ve Scriberia. (2020). Illustrations from the Turing Way book dashes. doi: 10.5281/ zenodo.3695300 google scholar
  • Vitale, C. R. (2016). Is research reproducibility the new data management for libraries? Bulletin of the associa-tion for information science and technology, 42(3), 38-41. doi:10.1002/bul2.2016.1720420313 google scholar


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.