"Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science
Awards can propel academic careers. They also reflect the culture and values of the scientific community. But do awards incentivize greater transparency, inclusivity, and openness in science? Our cross-disciplinary survey of 222 awards for the "best" journal articles across all 27 SCImago...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PLoS biology 2024-07, Vol.22 (7), p.e3002715 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | e3002715 |
| container_title | PLoS biology |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | Lagisz, Malgorzata Rutkowska, Joanna Aich, Upama Ross, Robert M Santana, Manuela S Wang, Joshua Trubanová, Nina Page, Matthew J Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu Yang, Yefeng Amin, Bawan Martinig, April Robin Barnett, Adrian Surendran, Aswathi Zhang, Ju Borg, David N Elisee, Jafsia Wrightson, James G Nakagawa, Shinichi |
| description | Awards can propel academic careers. They also reflect the culture and values of the scientific community. But do awards incentivize greater transparency, inclusivity, and openness in science? Our cross-disciplinary survey of 222 awards for the "best" journal articles across all 27 SCImago subject areas revealed that journals and learned societies administering such awards generally publish little detail on their procedures and criteria. Award descriptions were brief, rarely including contact details or information on the nominations pool. Nominations of underrepresented groups were not explicitly encouraged, and concepts that align with Open Science were almost absent from the assessment criteria. At the same time, 10% of awards, especially the recently established ones, tended to use article-level impact metrics. USA-affiliated researchers dominated the winner's pool (48%), while researchers from the Global South were uncommon (11%). Sixty-one percent of individual winners were men. Overall, Best Paper awards miss the global calls for greater transparency and equitable access to academic recognition. We provide concrete and implementable recommendations for scientific awards to improve the scientific recognition system and incentives for better scientific practice. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002715 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11265724</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A804260948</galeid><sourcerecordid>A804260948</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-c1f445903b347661f4db0c6d45e720602f6fd5739688f9eb7da27f4858479c6f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkltrFDEcxQdR7EW_gUioLwrumvvlqdTipVDcYtXXkMkka-psMiYzrf32Ztm1dMEHJQ_JP_mdQzicpnmG4BwRgd5cpSlH08-HNqQ5gRALxB40-4hRNhNSsof3znvNQSlXlcEKy8fNHlGQYqbQfnNx9NaVEVyYweUjYG5M7grojf0BxmxiGUx20d6-BiHafirhOox1MLEDZRqGlEfgUwaLwUVwaUNF3ZPmkTd9cU-3-2Hz9f27L6cfZ-eLD2enJ-czS5kYZxZ5SpmCpCVUcF6nroWWd5Q5gSGH2HPfMUEUl9Ir14rOYOGpZJIKZbknh83xxneY2pXrrIv1w70ecliZfKuTCXr3JYbvepmuNUKYM4FpdXi5dcjp51RT0KtQrOt7E12aiiZQ0pqqoqqiLzbo0vROh-hTtbRrXJ_IGiWHispKzf9C1dW5VbApOh_q_Y7g1Y6gMqP7NS7NVIo-u_z8H-ynf2cX33ZZumFtTqVk5-8iRFCvi6a3RdProult0ars-f3470R_mkV-Ayo_zl0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3084027949</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>"Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Lagisz, Malgorzata ; Rutkowska, Joanna ; Aich, Upama ; Ross, Robert M ; Santana, Manuela S ; Wang, Joshua ; Trubanová, Nina ; Page, Matthew J ; Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu ; Yang, Yefeng ; Amin, Bawan ; Martinig, April Robin ; Barnett, Adrian ; Surendran, Aswathi ; Zhang, Ju ; Borg, David N ; Elisee, Jafsia ; Wrightson, James G ; Nakagawa, Shinichi</creator><contributor>Dirnagl, Ulrich</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lagisz, Malgorzata ; Rutkowska, Joanna ; Aich, Upama ; Ross, Robert M ; Santana, Manuela S ; Wang, Joshua ; Trubanová, Nina ; Page, Matthew J ; Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu ; Yang, Yefeng ; Amin, Bawan ; Martinig, April Robin ; Barnett, Adrian ; Surendran, Aswathi ; Zhang, Ju ; Borg, David N ; Elisee, Jafsia ; Wrightson, James G ; Nakagawa, Shinichi ; Dirnagl, Ulrich</creatorcontrib><description>Awards can propel academic careers. They also reflect the culture and values of the scientific community. But do awards incentivize greater transparency, inclusivity, and openness in science? Our cross-disciplinary survey of 222 awards for the "best" journal articles across all 27 SCImago subject areas revealed that journals and learned societies administering such awards generally publish little detail on their procedures and criteria. Award descriptions were brief, rarely including contact details or information on the nominations pool. Nominations of underrepresented groups were not explicitly encouraged, and concepts that align with Open Science were almost absent from the assessment criteria. At the same time, 10% of awards, especially the recently established ones, tended to use article-level impact metrics. USA-affiliated researchers dominated the winner's pool (48%), while researchers from the Global South were uncommon (11%). Sixty-one percent of individual winners were men. Overall, Best Paper awards miss the global calls for greater transparency and equitable access to academic recognition. We provide concrete and implementable recommendations for scientific awards to improve the scientific recognition system and incentives for better scientific practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1545-7885</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1544-9173</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-7885</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002715</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39042591</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Awards (Prizes) ; Awards and Prizes ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Demographic aspects ; Evaluation ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Meta ; Periodicals as Topic - standards ; Publishing - standards ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Research Personnel ; Science ; Science Policy ; Social aspects ; Social Sciences</subject><ispartof>PLoS biology, 2024-07, Vol.22 (7), p.e3002715</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2024 Lagisz et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2024 Lagisz et al 2024 Lagisz et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-c1f445903b347661f4db0c6d45e720602f6fd5739688f9eb7da27f4858479c6f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3993-6127</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265724/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11265724/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2914,27903,27904,53769,53771</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39042591$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Dirnagl, Ulrich</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lagisz, Malgorzata</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutkowska, Joanna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aich, Upama</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, Robert M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santana, Manuela S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Joshua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trubanová, Nina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Page, Matthew J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yefeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amin, Bawan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martinig, April Robin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barnett, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Surendran, Aswathi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Ju</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borg, David N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elisee, Jafsia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wrightson, James G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakagawa, Shinichi</creatorcontrib><title>"Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science</title><title>PLoS biology</title><addtitle>PLoS Biol</addtitle><description>Awards can propel academic careers. They also reflect the culture and values of the scientific community. But do awards incentivize greater transparency, inclusivity, and openness in science? Our cross-disciplinary survey of 222 awards for the "best" journal articles across all 27 SCImago subject areas revealed that journals and learned societies administering such awards generally publish little detail on their procedures and criteria. Award descriptions were brief, rarely including contact details or information on the nominations pool. Nominations of underrepresented groups were not explicitly encouraged, and concepts that align with Open Science were almost absent from the assessment criteria. At the same time, 10% of awards, especially the recently established ones, tended to use article-level impact metrics. USA-affiliated researchers dominated the winner's pool (48%), while researchers from the Global South were uncommon (11%). Sixty-one percent of individual winners were men. Overall, Best Paper awards miss the global calls for greater transparency and equitable access to academic recognition. We provide concrete and implementable recommendations for scientific awards to improve the scientific recognition system and incentives for better scientific practice.</description><subject>Awards (Prizes)</subject><subject>Awards and Prizes</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Demographic aspects</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Meta</subject><subject>Periodicals as Topic - standards</subject><subject>Publishing - standards</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Research Personnel</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Science Policy</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><issn>1545-7885</issn><issn>1544-9173</issn><issn>1545-7885</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkltrFDEcxQdR7EW_gUioLwrumvvlqdTipVDcYtXXkMkka-psMiYzrf32Ztm1dMEHJQ_JP_mdQzicpnmG4BwRgd5cpSlH08-HNqQ5gRALxB40-4hRNhNSsof3znvNQSlXlcEKy8fNHlGQYqbQfnNx9NaVEVyYweUjYG5M7grojf0BxmxiGUx20d6-BiHafirhOox1MLEDZRqGlEfgUwaLwUVwaUNF3ZPmkTd9cU-3-2Hz9f27L6cfZ-eLD2enJ-czS5kYZxZ5SpmCpCVUcF6nroWWd5Q5gSGH2HPfMUEUl9Ir14rOYOGpZJIKZbknh83xxneY2pXrrIv1w70ecliZfKuTCXr3JYbvepmuNUKYM4FpdXi5dcjp51RT0KtQrOt7E12aiiZQ0pqqoqqiLzbo0vROh-hTtbRrXJ_IGiWHispKzf9C1dW5VbApOh_q_Y7g1Y6gMqP7NS7NVIo-u_z8H-ynf2cX33ZZumFtTqVk5-8iRFCvi6a3RdProult0ars-f3470R_mkV-Ayo_zl0</recordid><startdate>20240723</startdate><enddate>20240723</enddate><creator>Lagisz, Malgorzata</creator><creator>Rutkowska, Joanna</creator><creator>Aich, Upama</creator><creator>Ross, Robert M</creator><creator>Santana, Manuela S</creator><creator>Wang, Joshua</creator><creator>Trubanová, Nina</creator><creator>Page, Matthew J</creator><creator>Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu</creator><creator>Yang, Yefeng</creator><creator>Amin, Bawan</creator><creator>Martinig, April Robin</creator><creator>Barnett, Adrian</creator><creator>Surendran, Aswathi</creator><creator>Zhang, Ju</creator><creator>Borg, David N</creator><creator>Elisee, Jafsia</creator><creator>Wrightson, James G</creator><creator>Nakagawa, Shinichi</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3993-6127</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240723</creationdate><title>"Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science</title><author>Lagisz, Malgorzata ; Rutkowska, Joanna ; Aich, Upama ; Ross, Robert M ; Santana, Manuela S ; Wang, Joshua ; Trubanová, Nina ; Page, Matthew J ; Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu ; Yang, Yefeng ; Amin, Bawan ; Martinig, April Robin ; Barnett, Adrian ; Surendran, Aswathi ; Zhang, Ju ; Borg, David N ; Elisee, Jafsia ; Wrightson, James G ; Nakagawa, Shinichi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-c1f445903b347661f4db0c6d45e720602f6fd5739688f9eb7da27f4858479c6f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Awards (Prizes)</topic><topic>Awards and Prizes</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Demographic aspects</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Meta</topic><topic>Periodicals as Topic - standards</topic><topic>Publishing - standards</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Research Personnel</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Science Policy</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lagisz, Malgorzata</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutkowska, Joanna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aich, Upama</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, Robert M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santana, Manuela S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Joshua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trubanová, Nina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Page, Matthew J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yefeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amin, Bawan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martinig, April Robin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barnett, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Surendran, Aswathi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Ju</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borg, David N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elisee, Jafsia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wrightson, James G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakagawa, Shinichi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>PLoS biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lagisz, Malgorzata</au><au>Rutkowska, Joanna</au><au>Aich, Upama</au><au>Ross, Robert M</au><au>Santana, Manuela S</au><au>Wang, Joshua</au><au>Trubanová, Nina</au><au>Page, Matthew J</au><au>Pua, Andrew Adrian Yu</au><au>Yang, Yefeng</au><au>Amin, Bawan</au><au>Martinig, April Robin</au><au>Barnett, Adrian</au><au>Surendran, Aswathi</au><au>Zhang, Ju</au><au>Borg, David N</au><au>Elisee, Jafsia</au><au>Wrightson, James G</au><au>Nakagawa, Shinichi</au><au>Dirnagl, Ulrich</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>"Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science</atitle><jtitle>PLoS biology</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS Biol</addtitle><date>2024-07-23</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e3002715</spage><pages>e3002715-</pages><issn>1545-7885</issn><issn>1544-9173</issn><eissn>1545-7885</eissn><abstract>Awards can propel academic careers. They also reflect the culture and values of the scientific community. But do awards incentivize greater transparency, inclusivity, and openness in science? Our cross-disciplinary survey of 222 awards for the "best" journal articles across all 27 SCImago subject areas revealed that journals and learned societies administering such awards generally publish little detail on their procedures and criteria. Award descriptions were brief, rarely including contact details or information on the nominations pool. Nominations of underrepresented groups were not explicitly encouraged, and concepts that align with Open Science were almost absent from the assessment criteria. At the same time, 10% of awards, especially the recently established ones, tended to use article-level impact metrics. USA-affiliated researchers dominated the winner's pool (48%), while researchers from the Global South were uncommon (11%). Sixty-one percent of individual winners were men. Overall, Best Paper awards miss the global calls for greater transparency and equitable access to academic recognition. We provide concrete and implementable recommendations for scientific awards to improve the scientific recognition system and incentives for better scientific practice.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>39042591</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pbio.3002715</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3993-6127</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1545-7885 |
| ispartof | PLoS biology, 2024-07, Vol.22 (7), p.e3002715 |
| issn | 1545-7885 1544-9173 1545-7885 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11265724 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Awards (Prizes) Awards and Prizes Computer and Information Sciences Demographic aspects Evaluation Female Humans Male Meta Periodicals as Topic - standards Publishing - standards Research and Analysis Methods Research Personnel Science Science Policy Social aspects Social Sciences |
| title | "Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T07%3A22%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%22Best%20Paper%22%20awards%20lack%20transparency,%20inclusivity,%20and%20support%20for%20Open%20Science&rft.jtitle=PLoS%20biology&rft.au=Lagisz,%20Malgorzata&rft.date=2024-07-23&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e3002715&rft.pages=e3002715-&rft.issn=1545-7885&rft.eissn=1545-7885&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002715&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA804260948%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3084027949&rft_id=info:pmid/39042591&rft_galeid=A804260948&rfr_iscdi=true |