Chapter 8: Starting Open Science methodologies and initiation within your own network

Eduarda Centeno, Mona Zimmerman, Mar Barrantes-Cepas, Diana Bocancea, Janneke Lemmerzaal, Ruxandra Coman, Linda Douw

In this chapter, we would like to take you on a journey and show you how our working group came about. This may inspire you to kick-start your working group and spread OS in your department. When we started to set up our group, we had just one idea: How can we make our department more open sciency?

We quickly realised that a huge amount of motivation and enthusiasm was not enough to answer this question… or even get started. More questions than answers followed: How can we motivate people to adopt OS practices? Is the department’s infrastructure even ready to adopt OS principles? And how can we make our efforts sustainable and not just another buzzword endeavour?

In the beginning, we were lost. What we eagerly needed was a plan and a step-by-step guide for setting up this OS working group. But what followed was more of a trial-and-error adventure. We had many ideas and said yes to many of them. Eventually, this helped us find our groove. Reflecting on our journey, a few things came our way that immensely helped us start our group and become effective in what we do.

We have curated these experiences here as a step-by-step plan, a blueprint for starting an OS working group in your own department:

Getting the Green Light

An essential first step in the journey was to obtain the green light from department leadership to even form a working group. Having the full support of the department head and the management team made us confident that change could happen. It also ensured that we felt like we were doing something valuable with our time that our supervisors supported. With time, we broadened this support by including supervisors in some of our projects and reporting our progress, showing how valuable the work is for them.

Tip: If your department leadership is not convinced initially, try to build a case on why OS is important. For instance, politically, OS has become a priority in the Netherlands, and many funding agencies now mandate OS to be taken into account. Also, finding as many people as possible in the department to join your group will help make a case.

Building a Diverse Squad

What is a working group without enthusiastic, diverse members? Very importantly, we tried right from the start to bring together a dream team representing all facets of the department for a well-rounded approach (students, PIs, technicians, educators, etc). This ensured that every group of the department was on board and that the word of OS could be spread to all corners of the department. This is especially valuable for neuroscience, as it is a diverse field ranging from molecular research to whole-brain network neuroscience. Importantly, this means that the OS practices that need to be implemented depend on the neuroscience subfield (see previous chapters). Strive to represent this diversity in your group and use every member’s expertise!

Tip: Including members with different (cultural, educational) backgrounds, experience levels, and perspectives greatly helped us get the most out of our ideas. It helped to make well-rounded content relevant for everyone in the department. Also, representing a diverse group made it easier to convince the last non-believers.

Spotting the Interest

Now, let’s begin the actual work. As mentioned above, at first, we had many questions. Where to start? What is the most relevant OS topic that needs to be addressed? Which practices have already been adopted or must be introduced to the department? Tailoring our focus to the work of the department was our friend here. We created a simple but informative survey in Google Forms and sent it around the department. We included questions about the current adaptation of OS principles, the hurdles and reasons for adopting it and whether people generally feel open and ready to follow OS. We also asked what resources and events people would find helpful to get started. In general, this survey helped our working group get started. We knew at what level to begin and got ideas about what is needed to become more open sciency.

Tip: Of course, other ways to get an overview are also helpful. For example, we overviewed which practices each team is already implementing in their day-to-day work. This was not only useful for developing workshops, but it was also fun to share with the department as a motivation and inspiration for the other groups

Monthly Brainstorm Sessions

Cue the monthly meet-ups! We brainstormed, laughed a lot, and cooked up a vision and plan for our OS adventure. Meeting every month was necessary to organise and orchestrate our next steps.

Tip: Meeting every 4 weeks was the right interval to cross things off our to-do lists and not procrastinate our efforts too much. But it takes some time to figure out the right rhythm. Maybe one or two weeks between meetings would suit your group better if you are a smaller group, for example.

Team Trio

As our group was quite large from the get-go, we quickly noticed that delegating tasks was messy. As a solution, we split into three squads for maximum impact:

Communication Crew

The communication crew is responsible for events, seminars, and creating a cool bi-monthly newsletter (Find them here[https://osf.io/v9fru/]). We found it very important to continuously show our department what we are currently doing and what we have achieved. Especially since we are running this working group voluntarily, next to our ‘real’ work, our PIs found it essential to know what we invest our time in and whether it is fruitful. Also, the newsletter allowed us to give timely, neuroscience-specific advice and tips in an accessible manner.

Workshop Wizards

Getting hands-on with practical interventions. How can we teach about OS and bring the word of OS to everyone in the department and beyond? These are the main questions that the workshop team ask themselves. The workshop wizards are responsible for the educational part of our working group and organise OS afternoons, presentations and seminars for the department. They are also responsible for teaching about the OS group outside our department to inspire others to create their own working group. It is beneficial to have a team specifically dedicated to this task, as preparing practical presentations and organising a time and place to give them turned out to be more work than anticipated.

Grant Gang

Money, Money, Money - such a necessary thing to have in science. Our team established a grant gang to scour the land for funds. We thought money would be helpful to be able, for instance, to properly organise department workshops and hackathons and to set up an OS infrastructure for data and data sharing in our department (e.g., paying for server storage to store the vast NIfTI images of all those brains). Importantly, obtaining money through grants, as a side effect, helped us gain independence and status in the department. Also, this money ensures we can continue our work in the coming years (i.e. sustainability).

Searching for important collaborations

Even though our working group focuses on our specific department, a crucial step for the development and effectiveness of the group was to search for close collaborators who could help us in this journey. Such collaborations can strengthen your case and show that your work is grounded in a more significant movement. Below, you can find all the collaborations we established and the movements we joined. There are a lot of general resources and initiatives for OS that also works with or for neurosciences (for example, see Chapter 7). However, in the future, we would love to see the movement growing specifically for neurosciences…Will your young working group help with this initiative??

A continuous assessment and communication with our peers

Last but not least, building and maintaining an OS working group is constant learning and improvement. Our goal is to transform how we work as scientists - everything we do in the working group builds towards this goal. Shortly after establishing the working group, we set out to get a snapshot of our department’s current progress in OS practices. We create yearly evaluation surveys asking about the enthusiasm and reality of adopting OS. In these anonymous surveys, we ask people’s opinions about our workshops, newsletters and ambitions in general. Then, we use this information to create new content, improve our work and set the focus for the coming year. Apart from this anonymous evaluation, it is even more important to constantly exchange with our peers outside of the group and the department’s seniors. We can use them to further improve as they provide guidance and valuable feedback. So don’t fear the feedback.

And that’s it! This is our simple guide to creating an OS working group to get things rolling. Of course, this is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Every department works differently and might have different needs, but we hope these first simple steps will help you start thinking about creating your own working group.

With this friendly and organised approach, we’re not just spreading the word but actively steering our department toward the exciting world of Open Science!

Our networking and linked initiatives:

Open Science Communities

The Open Science Communities in the Netherlands is a bottom-up, community-driven initiative aimed at building a social infrastructure for Open Science. It is present in various cities in the country and has recently expanded internationally (check out INOSC). Interesting point: community engagement is one of the pillars of the Dutch National Programme for Open Science, and OSCs are being [granted substantial] funding(https://www.openscience.nl/en/news/a-boost-for-open-science-communities-at-dutch-universities) for sustained maintenance!

The OSWG experience with OSCs: one of our first steps was to connect with the OSC-Amsterdam (OSCA) to learn about local developments and create a support network in our adventure toward aligning the department with OS. Through regular meetings and discussions, we were able to bounce back ideas and educate ourselves about the local and national picture of OS. Also, we organised and hosted ceremonies to bring incentives to the community (check out the OSCAward recap) and worked together on plans for the following years, individually and collectively. Without question, this partnership has been significant for us and has helped us grow immensely.

ReproHack

ReproHack emerges as a dynamic initiative to address the critical issue of computational reproducibility in scientific practices. At the heart of ReproHack is a unique and participatory event format where participants gather to collaboratively review and reproduce published research findings. By bringing together researchers, students, and professionals, ReproHack creates a platform for shared exploration of open science principles and hands-on experience in reproducing scientific studies. This initiative not only emphasises the importance of transparency and replicability but actively engages participants in uncovering challenges and solutions in the process. With events held globally, ReproHack is making significant strides in fostering a culture of openness and accountability within the research community, ensuring that reproducibility remains a cornerstone of scientific inquiry.

The OSWG experience with ReproHack: Together with researchers from other departments, we collaboratively organised a ReproHack event at our institution, Reprohack Amsterdam Neuroscience. Taking into account the busy schedules of neuroscientists (i.e. our potential participants), the event was structured to be a one-day-long hackathon in which they would review and reproduce articles with published data and code. The participants were given a list of articles they could choose from, some donated by the authors, while others scouted from journals that require authors to provide open access to data and code. While a critical element of the ReproHack format is that authors should submit the papers they want reproduced, we needed help finding those authors who would be able or willing to submit work in our field. A month and a half of active event promotion, a room with a big screen, tables and lots of plugs, some money for lunch and a couple speakers, and we have a ReproHack! While there were many issues with the codes and data of the papers, the event was successful (measured by the frustration participants experienced at the end of the day ;) ), and we all went home after learning lots of things. A key highlight was the discussion at the end, which emphasised the impact of these activities on the community. Early career researchers, including master interns and PhD candidates, gained valuable insights into the common issues that make computational reproducibility hard. They learned the importance of proper documentation, working with environments, and tracking dependencies. The event underscored that reproducibility is not just about checking boxes but involves adopting a series of best practices in scientific work.

Software Carpentry

With a mission to teach foundational software and data science skills, Software Carpentry offers workshops and resources designed to enhance computational literacy across various disciplines. These workshops cover topics such as version control, programming languages, and data management, providing participants with practical skills immediately applicable to their research.

The OSWG experience with Software Carpentry: One of our collaborations was organising and hosting a Software Carpentry event with the VU library, teaching Git and R. The material used for these lessons is advantageous and straightforward, and as a team, it was great to learn how to introduce them to a diverse audience.

OLS

Open Life Science (OLS),through its innovative Open Seeds program, stands at the forefront of fostering openness and collaboration within the life sciences community. Open Seeds represents a dedicated effort to empower individuals and teams within the life sciences to embrace open research projects, enhancing transparency and reproducibility in their work. This program, facilitated by Open Life Science, provides participants with a structured and supportive environment for developing open projects, refining essential skills, and building a solid network of like-minded collaborators. With a focus on inclusivity and community engagement, OLS-8 exemplifies the commitment to creating a culture where open science thrives. By leveraging the power of collective knowledge and collaboration, OLS-8 contributes significantly to advancing the principles of open research within the life sciences, shaping a more accessible and collaborative future for the scientific community.

The OSWG experience with OLS: We had a highly positive experience with the OLS8 program. The proposal writing process was manageable, and they offered funding support. We had biweekly calls with our mentor; she was lovely and supportive and tried to help as much as she could, understanding our challenges and knowing that some weeks we couldn’t progress as we would have liked. On top of that, we had biweekly calls (on the alternative weeks) and discussion sessions with other participants, who were also enthusiastic. We appreciated the option to watch past calls on [YouTube] (https://www.youtube.com/@OpenLifeSci) and found them informative for our project and personal and other project-related insights. The Slack community provided a platform for seeking feedback; everyone was willing to help. Interacting with people from diverse backgrounds and nationalities was interesting, offering different perspectives, work styles, and insights into their challenges. Overall, the OLS team was supportive and ensured participant well-being. We would definitely recommend applying to the Open Seeds program.

ReproducibiliTea

The initiative primarily revolves around organising “ReproducibiliTea journal clubs,” regular meetings where participants critically examine research papers. ReproducibiliTea’s core objective is to cultivate a safe and collaborative environment, improving the exchange of knowledge and insights on scientific practices and Open Science. The ReproducibiliTea does not enforce any specific format for the meetings; however, it does offer kick-start guides and a great community that you can always touch base with on Slack. Here is its page on how to get started! Another tip: check out their podcast!

The OSWG experience with RTea: one of the OSWG members has a few years of experience hosting RTea JCs, and her thoughts are that it’s a very nice way to have informal conversations and educate yourself about the OS movement; it brings a community feel to the discussion and also it’s pretty easy to set up. In case you cannot start an OSWG from the beginning, a Rtea JC could be a very nice way to go. There are a few of them in the Netherlands, you can also just join them!

Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training

The FORRT (Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training) initiative provides a rich repository of resources designed to facilitate the implementation of OS concepts in pedagogical training. Whether you’re an early-career researcher seeking guidance on research design or an educator aiming to integrate best practices into your curriculum, FORRT offers a comprehensive suite of resources spanning various disciplines. Check it out: how to get involved.

The OSWG experience with FORRT: one of the OSWG members has contributed to the ‘Summaries’ project from FORRT and had a great experience communicating with the main initiative organisers. She also had one of them present FORRT at an RTea journal club session she was organizing.

Turing Way

The Turing Way provides a comprehensive guide encompassing best practices, tools, and resources for conducting reproducible research. Through its openly accessible and continually evolving handbook, The Turing Way cultivates a community-driven ethos, inviting contributors to share their expertise and insights. Here is a page on how to contribute to this initiative.

The OSWG experience with Turing Way: They are one of our main inspirations and a go-to page in case of doubts. Most of the essential information is explained on their website. Our only complaint is that sometimes, it isn´t specific enough for neuroscience. That’s why we have created these guidelines!