Accepted Contributions

Accepted contributions for the Call for Poster Presentations

Overall, we received 60 submissions for the Call for poster presentations. Among the high amount of excellent abstracts, the programme committee decided to accept 20 abstracts for poster presentations. The best eight abstracts are additionally presented as short talks. See also conference programme.

All abstracts have been reviewed by a review board (see below) based on the following review criteria – rating from -2 (very low/poor) to 2 (very high/good):

  • Relevance for the conference topic
  • Practical relevance
  • Innovative, scientific, and/or societal relevance
  • Overall recommendation

The possible maximum average score is 8.0.

Following is the list of all accepted submissions including a scientific justification for their acceptance based on the reviewers’ comments. The shown rating values are the average of all independent reviews.

1. Driving institutional change for open, responsible research and innovation – Results from 3 years FIT4RRI project
Helene Brinken 1, Antonia Correia2  and Maxie Gottschling1
1Göttingen State and University Library, 2University of Minho

The contribution on driving institutional change for open, responsible research and innovation is based on an extensive literature review and four case studies. The findings have high impact for institutions that want to open up their research and implement the principles of Open Science and Responsible Research & Innovation. The empirical results presented by the authors seem highly relevant to spread best practices across research institutions.  Thus, this contribution is particular suitable for the Open Science Conference 2020.

Average reviewers ratings: 7.5

2. The INOS Project: Integrating Open and Citizen Science Into Active Learning Approaches in Higher Education
Evangelia Triantafyllou1, Katerina Zourou2 and Vasso Kalaitzi3
1Aalborg University, 2Web2Learn, 3LIBER

The contribution describes an EC project that aims at integrating Open Science and Citizen Science into active learning approaches and at modernizing higher education institutions curricula through civic engagement. The authors introduce a detailed plan how to strengthen the integration of Open and Citizen Science, especially their application within institutes of higher education. The different outlined objectives address a good amount of currently existing problems within this topic.

Overall, the objectives of the project are promising and the integration of Citizen Science and Open Science practices is an interesting and important issue for the Open Science community.

Average reviewers ratings: 6.7

3. Scientific Culture Change from Above and Below at UBCO: Implementation of a Comprehensive Open Science Library Information Literacy Program for Undergraduates
Sharon Hanna1
1University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus

The author describes the creation, deployment, and evaluation of an Open Science library information literacy programme specifically for undergraduates with the pilot target group of Biology students in the US. The contribution is of high interest for the Open Science Conference 2020 audience and fits well in the call. The evaluation results of the programme and the structure of the curriculum might help others to design and offer similar programmes. Teaching Open Science to undergraduates still seems to be a rare thing, and the author convincingly argues that the sooner people encounter Open Science practices, the more likely they adopt them.

 Average reviewers ratings: 6.7

 4. Perspectives on the Nature of Open Data in Business Cooperation
Seliina Päällysaho1, Jaana Latvanen1, Anne Kärki2, Anttoni Lehto3, Jaakko Riihimaa4, Pekka Lahti4, Hanna Lahtinen5, Eija Suikkanen3 and Helena Puhakka-Tarvainen6
1Seinäjoki University of Applied Sciences, 2Satakunta University of Applied Sciences, 3Turku University of Applied Sciences, 4Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences, 5Laurea University of Applied Sciences, 6Karelia University of Applied Sciences

 The authors describe an ongoing Open Science transition within Universities of Applied Sciences in Finland. This leads to practical challenges regarding FAIR RDI data like co-creation of metadata together with businesses, legal issues and diverging interests. Particularly noteworthy are the best practices described by the authors in the open RDI process cycle. It addresses critical aspects regarding Open RDI, Open Data and Open Science within business cooperation, which is relevant and important for the conference.

 Average reviewers ratings: 6.7

5. Empowering next generation open scholarship with an open science fellows program
Christopher Schwarzkopf1, Benedikt Fecher2, Isabella Peters3 and Moritz Schubotz4
1Wikimedia Deutschland, 2Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), 3ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics / Kiel University, 4University of Wuppertal

This summary presents a programme dedicated to junior researchers, who receive a grant and support (8 months mentoring, participation in workshops) to develop their Open Science skills and practices. The goal is to find a balance between traditional scholarly practices and innovative more open practices. Since 2016, there is a solid experience with 50 researchers trained from various disciplines. This approach is intended as a model for similar approaches at the institutional, national or international level.  The topic is very much in the themes of the conference in relation to support Open Science practices and their application as well as empirical studies and use cases about the scientific benefit of Open Science practices.

Average reviewers ratings: 6.3

6. A platform for mainstreaming citizen science and open science in Europe
Katherin Wagenknecht1 and Tim Woods2
1Museum für Naturkunde  – Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science, 2 European Citizen Science Association

 The contribution about a platform for mainstreaming Citizen Science and Open Science in Europe is an interesting and quite ambitious proposal. Citizen Science is highly beneficial for both science and society. A stronger connection and mutual promotion between Citizen Science and Open Science is highly desirable and the European platform that will be presented could give a relevant contribution to that. It pursues a European approach and wants to bring (information about) various initiatives together.

 Average reviewers ratings:  6.0

7. TRIPLE: A European discovery platform for the SSH
Peter Kraker1 and Judith Schulte2
1Open Knowledge Maps, 2Max Weber  Foundation – German Humanities Institutes Abroad

The authors present a discovery platform for the social sciences and humanities (SSH) across Europe. They clearly answer the call of the conference by introducing a platform to support Open Science practices, more specifically inter- and transdisciplinary exchange in social sciences and humanities and the attempt at offering a multilingual research database with added functionality. A European platform for data discovery and exchange in the SSH is very much needed in the community as well as an adequate strategy to foster interdisciplinary research and knowledge transfer to non-academic actors. Thus, the presented project is highly relevant in the context of Open Science.

Average reviewers ratings:  6.0

8. A decentralized high-intensity approach to foster data management best practices and publication of open research data
Harald von Waldow1
1Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology

The contribution presents a local FAIR-compliant research data repository and  it is potential to foster a cultural change as regards the willingness to share research data.  Research data is one of the important elements of Open Science. The approach towards research data management is usually directed to the inclusion of data in big high-level data infrastructures. The approach presented in the abstract, based on small-scale distributed data repositories, is very interesting because it relates to a very common situation in many research institutes and thus, has high practical relevance. Accordingly, the contribution is of high relevance for Open Science (practices).

Average reviewers ratings:  6.0

9. Digital economy for Open Science
Ann Shkor1, Alex Shkor1 and Artyom Ruseckiy1

The contribution discusses innovative publishing platforms and technologies that could revolutionise the way how to conduct, share, evaluate, and fund research. The authors present a comprehensive system to innovate the R&D process using a decentralization approach and blockchain technology with the aim to create a digital ecosystem to identify the most prominent ideas and individuals, allocate and distribute resources to support them, and to achieve the most impactful results. Overall, such innovative publishing platforms and blockchain may help immensely to change the current scientific system and to foster Open Science.

Average reviewers ratings:   5.7

10. Realizing the Potential of Research Data: Subjectification as a Precondition for Reuse
Daniel Spichtinger1 and Marcel LaFlamme1
1Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft

The contribution discusses a new approach to analyse the conditions for the reuse of research data. The authors present an accordingly exploratory qualitative study (based on an extensive literature review and interviews) and outline the implications of the results for Open Science researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders. The issue of research data reuse is a key to Open Science, and the results from this contribution will be useful for future efforts to promote data reuse.

 Average reviewers ratings:   5.7

 11. Supporting Researchers in Creating Data Management Plans
Sebastian Netscher1, Anna Schwickerath1, Reiner Mauer1 and Anja Perry1
1GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences

The authors outline the development of standardized, public and referenceable data protocols for educational research, following the work of Science Europe and with the important principles of replicable research, FAIR data and Open Science in mind. Domain-specific data protocols will be a major step towards better RDM support for researchers. They will also make it easier for support services to follow up the compliance for requirements and recommendations. Thus, this contribution is certainly relevant for the Open Science community.

Average reviewers ratings:   5.5

12. Research Libraries – LIBER Open Science (up)skilling and training programmes in Europe: from selective case-studies to sharing best practices
Cecile Swiatek1, Helene Brinken2 and Vasso Kalaitzi1
1LIBER, 2Göttingen State and University Library

This abstract presents a study of Open Science training programmes offered to researchers and library staff. This pan-European study was conducted through interviews and case studies. It defines a set of skills needed in Open Science and provides guidance for setting up an institutional training programme. This proposal is very relevant as the issue of lifelong learning on the new and rapidly evolving themes of Open Science is crucial for university library staff and researchers. In recent years, many initiatives have been launched to offer online and face-to-face trainings on Open Science. This study can help clarifying this landscape.

Average reviewers ratings:   5.3

13. Catalyzing the Open Science Transformation by an Institutional Strategy 
Jochen Schirrwagen1, Cord Wiljes1, Christian Pietsch1, Nils Hachmeister2 and Andreas Czerniak1
1Bielefeld University Library, 2Bielefeld Center for Data Science

The abstract describes an institutional Open Science strategy and its practical implementation. This is very relevant to the conference topics, but also to the whole transformation to Open Science – as the authors correctly state, institutions play an important role in the adoption of Open Science practices. The presented approach is holistic and blends organizational measures with technical initiatives, advocacy and educational offerings. Furthermore, the approach and the solutions can be reused, which is important for the success of Open Science.

Average reviewers ratings:   5.2

14. Leveraging Open Access publishing to fight fake news
Sylvain Massip1 and Charles Letaillieur1

The authors present a case for the use of Open Access publications in order to fact-check (fake) news outside of the academic community. They plan to apply machine learning tools and natural language processing tools to develop and evaluate a „text-mining pipeline that indicates whether a scientific claim is backed by the scientific literature“. They make a good case for the practical need and implications of their idea  which is a very important topic and of high interest for the conference.

Average reviewers ratings:   5.2

15. (Re)Building Trust? Investigating the effects of badges on perceived trustworthiness in journal articles

Jürgen Schneider1, Samuel Merk1 and Tom Rosman2
1University of Tübingen, 2Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information

 In the abstract, the authors try to make a case for opening up the research cycle (i.e., level of transparency) as a way of increasing the perceived credibility of empirical findings. Specifically, the authors propose to study if visible Open Science practices foster perceived trustworthiness when reading journal articles of empirical studies. This is an interesting and timely research project and the results will be highly relevant for editors, authors and infrastructure providers looking to adopt or to foster Open Science practices.

Average reviewers ratings:   5.0

16. Sunlight is the best disinfectant: retractions and the role of Open Access
Jasmin Schmitz1
1ZB MED – Information Centre for Life Sciences

This abstract presents an interesting hypothesis – namely is there a relationship between retracted papers and whether they are published in Open Access journals? Many researchers do not publish transparently due to the fear of others being able to find errors in the paper. In this context, retractions are a sensitive topic but not yet investigated with respect to Open Science. The authors have done a good set of background reading and are using the right set of databases and tools to examine this. Hence, the results might be very interesting and a  fruitful basis for discussions at the conference.

Average reviewers ratings:   4.8

17. Between utopia and dystopia lays the land of knowledge or how to stimulate societal discourse based on fact, not fear
Luiza Bengtsson1
1Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association

This paper suggests to convey challenging (scientific) topics, here gene editing, by art-science collaboration. In the framework of a European Open Science project they conducted an artist residency programme. The winning concept (artist) was invited to spend some time in a science lab and finalizing the concept idea. The resulting piece of art was displayed in various countries and received international acknowledgement. Combining art and science for better communicating difficult topics in science with societal impact is a very innovative and promising approach. The outcome of the case study was highly successful and can act as a best practice example. It fits the targeted conference topic very well.

Average reviewers ratings:   4.8

18. EduArc – A FAIR and User-centred Infrastructure for Learning Resources

Iacopo Vagliano1, Tamara Heck2, Sylvia Kullmann2 and Ahmed Saleh1
1ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, 2 Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education

The submission presents a FAIR-compliant infrastructure for open educational resources (OER) which allows users to find OER from diverse relevant sources and to add new resources. The overall aim is to support the idea of open education practices. This is a good outline of a project that is very relevant for the conference.

Average reviewers ratings:   4.7

19. Developing Open RDI and Education
Anne Kärki1, Kaisa Jaalama2, Juhani Talvela2, Anttoni Lehto3, Seliina Päällysaho4 and Jaana Latvanen4
1Satakunta University of Applied Sciences, 2Aalto University, 3Turku University of Applied Sciences, 4Seinäjoki University of Applied Sciences

The submission reports two studies based on interviews and a survey among members of Universities of Applied Sciences in Finland aimed at better understanding the need for services that support Open RDI and Open Education in Finland. The abstract rationale is coherent and the topic is, of course, of much importance for the conference. It represents a good quality survey that is of very practical value.

Average reviewers ratings:   4.5

20. A Sustainable Scholar-led Model for Open Access Without Publication Fees
Paula Clemente Vega1

1Open Library of Humanities

The abstract describes an Open Access publishing platform for the humanities that follows the platinum model, i.e. that there are no APCs. Instead, funding is provided collaboratively by international library consortia. This project is very relevant to Open Science and the conference topics, as it shows how APCs, which present an important barrier to OA adoption in many disciplines and geographical areas, can be avoided, while at the same time providing a sustainable platform. It also presents an important contribution to the current debate around community-owned and community-driven open infrastructures.

Average reviewers ratings:  4.5

Review Board

  • Nicolás Alessandroni, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
  • Alessia Bardi, ISTI-CNR
  • Philipp Conzett, UiT The Arctic University of Norway
  • Andreas Czerniak, Bielefeld University Library
  • Benedikt Fecher, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG)
  • Sascha Friesike, Berlin University of the Arts / Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society
  • Romain Féret, University of Lille
  • Konrad Förstner, ZB MED – Information Centre for Life Sciences
  • Wilhelm Hasselbring, Kiel University
  • Kerstin Helbig, Humboldt University of Berlin
  • Maria Henkel, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
  • Peer Herholz, Montréal Neurological Institute & Hospital, McGill University
  • Jana Hoffmann, Museum für Naturkunde – Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science
  • Alexandra Jobmann, University Library Bielefeld / National Contact Point Open Access OA2020-DE
  • Reiner Jung, Kiel University
  • Robert Jäschke, Humboldt University of Berlin
  • Markus Konkol, Institute for Geoinformatics
  • Peter Kraker, Open Knowledge Maps
  • Bianca Kramer, Utrecht University
  • Dieter Kranzlmüller, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
  • André Lampe, freelance
  • Jana Lasser, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization
  • Stephanie Linek, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
  • Bertram Ludaescher, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • Philipp Mayr, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
  • Peter Mutschke, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
  • Heinz Pampel, Helmholtz Association
  • Isabella Peters, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics / Kiel University
  • Christian Pietsch, Bielefeld University
  • Fotis Psomopoulos, INAB|CERTH
  • Roland Ramthun, Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information
  • Wiebke Rössig, Museum für Naturkunde – Leibniz Institute  for Evolution and Biodiversity Science
  • Alessandro Sarretta, CNR-ISMAR
  • Kaja Scheliga, Helmholtz Open Science Office
  • Guido Scherp, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
  • Christoph Schickhardt, National Center for Tumor Diseases Heidelberg
  • Sonja Schimmler, Fraunhofer Institute for Open Communication Systems
  • Jochen Schirrwagen, Bielefeld University Library
  • Willi Scholz, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
  • Hugh Shanahan, Royal Holloway, University of London
  • Nataliia Sokolovska, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG)
  • Erich Weichselgartner, Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information
  • Thomas Weißgerber, University of Passau