Skip to ContentSkip to Navigation
Research Open Science Open Research Award

Submission guidelines

How to apply

Open Research practices aim to make scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society.

Staff members, PhD students and (Research) Master’s students from all UG faculties and the UMCG can submit case studies of Open Research practices, either as individuals or as teams.

Please note that case studies that had already been submitted for this award in previous editions are not eligible unless they are significantly improved upon. Individuals who have already been awarded an award or certificate in previous editions cannot participate again, unless it is with a team and on a different project.

A case study of no more than 600 words in length should discuss the use of one or more open practices in the conduct of research and/or communication of outputs to achieve specific research aims or solve particular problems. Applicants should use the Open Research objectives, practices and examples (below) to identify suitable subjects for their case study.

We encourage the submission of case studies that explore the challenges and difficulties of making open choices as well as those that celebrate positive experiences and successful outcomes. We are looking for candid accounts of researchers’ motivations for making (or not making) open choices, which offer reasoned assessments of the pros and cons of being open, and are honest about where things didn’t work or could have been done differently.

Eligibility criteria

The case study should be no more than 600 words in total (excluding the title and anything entered in the URLs, references and further information box).

The jury will judge entries based on their adherence to the following criteria:

  • Please specify one or more of the Open Research objectives/practices addressed in your case study (see below)
  • Introduction: Please provide a brief description of the open practice(s) used, as well as the context in which the open practices were used.
  • Motivation: Please address why the Open Research practices were used (e.g., what are the benefits and for whom)
  • Lessons learned: Please reflect on the barriers or challenges and/or supporting factors (e.g. supervisor, workshops, infrastructure) encountered


NB. Please note, it is required to include references to the work you describe in your case. E.g., if your case concerns a preregistration, please include the URL to the preregistration, if you have developed a free software package, please provide the URL, etc. If this is not possible, a justification is required which will be evaluated by the jury.

Objectives

Applicants should describe activities that align with one or more of the following objectives:

  • Making the outputs of research, including publications, data, software and other research materials freely accessible.
  • Using online tools and services to increase the transparency of research processes and methodologies.
  • Making scientific research more reproducible by increasing the amount and quality of information placed on the public record.
  • Using alternative models of publication and peer review to make the dissemination and certification of research faster and more transparent.
  • Using open collaborative methods and tools to increase efficiency and widen participation in research.
Practices

The case study should describe one or more of the open practices listed below:

  • Using publication under an open licence to communicate research outputs, which may include publications, data, software code, and web resources;
    NB: given that open access publishing is nowadays the most common publication mode for scholarly articles in most disciplines, and often mandated by the funder, having published open access articles alone will not be enough to qualify an entry as eligible. Open books are excluded from this provision since they are still much less common.

  • Disseminating research findings as a preprint, either independently of formal submission to a journal, or as part of a journal’s open peer review procedure;

  • Providing an open peer review of a paper submitted under a formal peer review process managed by a publisher;

  • Creating a public pre-registration of a study design or publishing a study as a registered report;
    NB: The preregistration needs to be finished, a URL to the pre-registration provided, and one should be at a stage where it is possible to reflect on the practice. That is, the paper does not need to be finished, but the analyses should be performed and the results written down. This makes it possible to reflect on the benefits\challenges of the preregistration and the subsequent analysis.

  • Publishing a data paper or software paper;

  • Incorporating open and participatory methods into the design and conduct of research, e.g. by using open notebook-based methods or creating a project using a ‘citizen science’ online platform;

  • Introducing Open Research concepts and practices into teaching and learning, including teaching about Open Research, and making teaching material openly available;

  • Creating new tools or technologies to facilitate Open Research practices, e.g. for combining or repurposing datasets and other research outputs from different locations or disciplines, or for mining content;

  • Undertaking activities to develop the environment for Open Research, e.g. by engaging in high-profile communications, by causing a journal to adopt pro-Open Research policies, or by participating in community initiatives to develop data or metadata standards.

Case study examples

These are some examples of suitable subjects for a case study:

  • A dataset or software source code created by you has been made openly available and subsequently re-used by researchers or other end-users, e.g. to inform policy-making or develop services or products;
  • You are a humanities researcher who has created an open web resource and consider the practicalities and challenges of sustaining long-term access and usability;
  • You have recently submitted an article through a publisher’s open peer review system, and discuss your experience and some of the pros and cons of open peer review;
  • You conduct qualitative social science research exploring sensitive issues and discuss the ethical and practical challenges of sharing data collected from participants;
  • You have developed a new software tool to facilitate Open Research, e.g. to combine or repurpose datasets from disparate sources;
  • You have participated in a community group to develop data or metadata standards and tools for your discipline;
  • In your teaching you have introduced students to Open Research principles and practices, for example by setting replication study assignments.
  • More examples

Rules
  1. Researchers, registered PhD and Master’s students are eligible to submit entries. Entries should be submitted using the application form. The closing date for applications is 15 September 2022, midnight.
  2. Entries may be submitted as individuals or as teams. Team entries must be submitted by one named individual who will be the lead applicant for the entry.
  3. The applicant must be a researcher and current member of staff or a registered PhD or Master’s student and expect to continue as a member of the University until at least 17 November 2022, the date of the award ceremony. For team entries, team members may include non-research staff (teaching staff, professional service staff) or individuals from outside the University.
  4. The jury will screen submissions to make sure that they satisfy the eligibility requirements. All eligible submissions will receive a certificate of participation.
  5. The jury may, by majority vote, decide to determine a submission eligible in cases where strictly speaking the eligibility criteria are not met, but a convincing case has been made for which the current criteria were not foreseen or appropriate.
  6. Case studies should describe the applicant's completed or ongoing experiences with Open Research practices.
    NB: Ongoing experiences and projects need to be sufficiently progressed to reflect on and should already have some sort of deliverable. I.e., a plan for a future project, or a project just starting is not eligible.
  7. Case studies that had already been submitted for this award in previous editions are not eligible unless they are significantly improved upon. Submissions that have already been awarded with an ORA award or certificate in previous editions are not eligible again.
  8. Three entries will be drawn randomly among the eligible submissions; each of these will receive a prize of 500 euros. These three entries will be notified by 1 November 2022 and will be invited to give a short presentation of their case study during the Open Research Award event on 17 November 2022.
  9. Applicants must give permission for the University of Groningen Library to publish an edited version of the case study and to disseminate it via internal and external communication channels. Final versions of material will be submitted to the applicants for approval prior to publication. All case studies will be published shortly after the event.
Procedure

Submitted entries will be screened for eligibility by a jury composed of UG and UMCG staff members. The organizers randomly draw three entries among the eligible submissions. The three applicants will be notified by early November 2022 and invited to present their case studies as lightning talks during the event on 17 November 2022 and will receive a prize of each 500 euros.

All eligible case studies will be given public attention through the website .

More information

Please send any enquiries concerning the Open Research Award to
openresearchaward rug.nl.

Last modified:06 May 2022 1.20 p.m.