I understand that open science is based on open data, open access, open source, open methodology, etc.

However, what does "open" exactly mean in context when we talk about "open science"?



If I had to condense the meaning of open in open science to a single word, it would be transparent.

The primary purpose of having open source software, accessible data, open access publishing, permissive licensing, and all of the other things we associate with open science, is to "open up" the scientific process as much as possible: allowing and enabling free and anonymous scrutiny of research outputs and the process that produced them, and for the repurposing of those outputs and processes for new research.

  • 1
    Hmm, it's common courtesy in StackExchange communities to provide a comment when you downvote someone's answer. Aug 6 '15 at 18:46
  • 1
    (Hard to know what the down-voter objected to...) Indeed, in addition to, or to make feasible, transparency and accessibility, economic barriers have to be removed or mitigated so that people not lucky enough to be "on the inside" in (e.g.) a U.S. university (with MathSciNet access, and so on) can have a fair chance. For-profit publishers who add ever-less value are obvious candidates... and so on. Economic issues loom large. Aug 23 '15 at 19:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.