Open Science in the sense of sharing research as it unfolds has been around for not much more than a decade, so the initial reasons for most researchers not to adopt it were somewhat trivial, e.g.
- not having heard about it
- not having thought about it
- not knowing what it means
- not knowing anyone who actually practices it
- not knowing how it would affect their research/ career/ community.
In recent years, the term - albeit not the practice - has found its way into mainstream research communication, so more researchers have actually heard and thought about it or know someone who has tried it out. With these developments, the reasons for not sharing are becoming more complex and worth exploring in more detail.
In doing so, I'd like us to
- collect reasons that are being put forward in response to questions about why some research is not shared
- group and structure these reasons
- analyze their validity
- explore underlying reasons that may contribute to not sharing but are not pointed out explicitly
- look into ways to addressing both the valid reasons and the invalid ones in suitable ways.
I am aware that this ticket may not be the best place to do all that, but I think it can serve as a way to coordinate activities in this space.