Cargando…
Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors
The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines provide a framework to help journals develop open science policies. Theories of behaviour change can guide understanding of why journals do (not) implement open science policies and the development of interventions to improve these policies. I...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890101/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36756061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.221093 |
_version_ | 1784880881849073664 |
---|---|
author | Naaman, Kevin Grant, Sean Kianersi, Sina Supplee, Lauren Henschel, Beate Mayo-Wilson, Evan |
author_facet | Naaman, Kevin Grant, Sean Kianersi, Sina Supplee, Lauren Henschel, Beate Mayo-Wilson, Evan |
author_sort | Naaman, Kevin |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines provide a framework to help journals develop open science policies. Theories of behaviour change can guide understanding of why journals do (not) implement open science policies and the development of interventions to improve these policies. In this study, we used the Theoretical Domains Framework to survey 88 journal editors on their capability, opportunity and motivation to implement TOP. Likert-scale questions assessed editor support for TOP, and enablers and barriers to implementing TOP. A qualitative question asked editors to provide reflections on their ratings. Most participating editors supported adopting TOP at their journal (71%) and perceived other editors in their discipline to support adopting TOP (57%). Most editors (93%) agreed their roles include maintaining policies that reflect current best practices. However, most editors (74%) did not see implementing TOP as a high priority compared with other editorial responsibilities. Qualitative responses expressed structural barriers to implementing TOP (e.g. lack of time, resources and authority to implement changes) and varying support for TOP depending on study type, open science standard, and level of implementation. We discuss how these findings could inform the development of theoretically guided interventions to increase open science policies, procedures and practices. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9890101 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | The Royal Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98901012023-02-07 Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors Naaman, Kevin Grant, Sean Kianersi, Sina Supplee, Lauren Henschel, Beate Mayo-Wilson, Evan R Soc Open Sci Science, Society and Policy The Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines provide a framework to help journals develop open science policies. Theories of behaviour change can guide understanding of why journals do (not) implement open science policies and the development of interventions to improve these policies. In this study, we used the Theoretical Domains Framework to survey 88 journal editors on their capability, opportunity and motivation to implement TOP. Likert-scale questions assessed editor support for TOP, and enablers and barriers to implementing TOP. A qualitative question asked editors to provide reflections on their ratings. Most participating editors supported adopting TOP at their journal (71%) and perceived other editors in their discipline to support adopting TOP (57%). Most editors (93%) agreed their roles include maintaining policies that reflect current best practices. However, most editors (74%) did not see implementing TOP as a high priority compared with other editorial responsibilities. Qualitative responses expressed structural barriers to implementing TOP (e.g. lack of time, resources and authority to implement changes) and varying support for TOP depending on study type, open science standard, and level of implementation. We discuss how these findings could inform the development of theoretically guided interventions to increase open science policies, procedures and practices. The Royal Society 2023-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9890101/ /pubmed/36756061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.221093 Text en © 2023 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Science, Society and Policy Naaman, Kevin Grant, Sean Kianersi, Sina Supplee, Lauren Henschel, Beate Mayo-Wilson, Evan Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
title | Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
title_full | Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
title_fullStr | Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
title_full_unstemmed | Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
title_short | Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
title_sort | exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the transparency and openness promotion guidelines: a theory-based survey of journal editors |
topic | Science, Society and Policy |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890101/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36756061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.221093 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT naamankevin exploringenablersandbarrierstoimplementingthetransparencyandopennesspromotionguidelinesatheorybasedsurveyofjournaleditors AT grantsean exploringenablersandbarrierstoimplementingthetransparencyandopennesspromotionguidelinesatheorybasedsurveyofjournaleditors AT kianersisina exploringenablersandbarrierstoimplementingthetransparencyandopennesspromotionguidelinesatheorybasedsurveyofjournaleditors AT suppleelauren exploringenablersandbarrierstoimplementingthetransparencyandopennesspromotionguidelinesatheorybasedsurveyofjournaleditors AT henschelbeate exploringenablersandbarrierstoimplementingthetransparencyandopennesspromotionguidelinesatheorybasedsurveyofjournaleditors AT mayowilsonevan exploringenablersandbarrierstoimplementingthetransparencyandopennesspromotionguidelinesatheorybasedsurveyofjournaleditors |