Monitoring of open science perception by Russian researchers
https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2025-9-102-121
Abstract
Russian researchers have changed their perception of open science concept comprising open access to current knowledge, studies transparency and open information sharing. The paper is based on the 2021 and 2024 surveys “Open Data Status”, and 2023 and 2025 surveys of the scientists and researchers at the Russian Academy of Sciences Siberian Branch. The purpose of the study is to reveal changes in researchers’ attitude toward open science, to get answers to the new questions regarding open science practices, to explore into new aspects of open research support system on the platform “The Library for Open Science”. Despite of low implementation of open science policy in Russia, some positive dynamics is observed in the practice of open access to research data and preprints, as well as of open peer review. Unawareness of research community of open science principles and tools remains the largest obstacle, which calls for system solutions, i. e. introduction of educational programs, efficient repositories, and well-developed data policy. The libraries are able to become an important resource to overcome these barriers and to provide information support to the researchers.
Keywords
open science,
Russian scientists,
Russian researchers,
open access open data,
preprints,
open peer review,
libraries,
information support,
Russian Academy of Sciences Siberian Branch
Supporting agencies: The study is completed under the research project by RAS SB State Public Scientific and Technological Library (2022–2026) “Development of the model of science library operation in the information ecosystem of open science” No. 122041100150-3.
About the Author
Lyudmila B. Shevchenko
State Public Scientific and Technological Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences Siberian Branch
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Lyudmila B. Shevchenko – Cand. Sc. (Pedagogy), Senior Researcher, Open Science Studies
Novosibirsk
References
1. IUNESKO. Predvaritel`ny`i` proekt Rekomendatcii IUNESKO ob otkry`toi` nauke. 2020. URL: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374837_rus (data obrashcheniia: 04.05.2022).
2. Kohrs F. E. et al. Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and open science training the norm at research institutions. eLife, 2023, 12 n. pag. DOI 10.7554/eLife.89736.
3. Vicente-Saez R. Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition. Journal of Business Research, 2018, 88: 428–436. DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.043.
4. Otkry`ty`i` dostup: istoriia, sovremennoe sostoianie i put` k otkry`toi` nauke : monografiia / M. V. Vakhrushev, M. V. Goncharov, I. I. Zasurskii` [i dr.] ; pod obshchei` i nauchnoi` redaktciei` Ia. L. Shrai`berga. 4-e izd. ster. Sankt-Peterburg : Lan`, 2023. 168 s.
5. Red`kina N. S. Rekonstruktciia informatcionnoi` e`kosistemy` otkry`toi` nauki v period global`ny`kh vy`zovov // Nauchny`e i tekhnicheskie biblioteki. 2022. № 8. S. 60–79. https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2022-8-60-79.
6. Bowling A. Just one question: If one question works, why ask several? Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 2005, 59:342–345. DOI 10.1136/jech.2004.021204.
7. Mahfooz A., Roslina O. Readiness towards the implementation of open science initiatives in the Malaysian Comprehensive Public Universities. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 2021, 47(5): 102368. DOI 10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102368.
8. Morais R. et al. From principles to practices: open science at Europe’s universities. 2020– 2021 EUA open science survey results. 2021. v1. Zenodo. DOI 10.5281/zenodo.4966025.
9. Ouvrir la Science: Publication of the 2024 French Open Science Monitor: increased sharing of research data but less communication of clinical trial results / The Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MESR) publishes the results of the French Open Science Monitor for 2024. URL: https://www.ouvrirlascience.fr/publication-of-the-2024-frenchopen-science-monitor-increased-sharing-of-research-data-but-less-communication-ofclinical-trial-results/ (accessed: 17.02.2025).
10. Toribio-Flórez D. et al. Where Do Early Career Researchers Stand on Open Science Practices? A Survey Within the Max Planck Society. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 2021, 5. DOI 10.3389/frma.2020.586992.
11. Veit K. et al. Attitudes Toward Open Science Practices Among German Psychologists. PsyArXiv. 2025, January 28. DOI 10.31234/osf.io/mbcu6_2.
12. Zhu Y. Open-access policy and data-sharing practice in UK academia. J Inf Sci. 2020, 46(1):41–52. DOI 10.1177/0165551518823174.
13. Zuiderwijk A., Shinde R., Jeng W. What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption. PLoS ONE, 2020, 15(9): e0239283. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0239283.
14. Babu H. R., Srilakshminarayana G., Vysakh C., Chandrakala B. A Survey on Open Access Publishing Preferences of Indian Scholars. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 2025, 26(1). DOI 10.3998/jep.397.
15. Baždarić K. et al. Attitudes and practices of open data, preprinting, and peer-review – A cross sectional study on Croatian scientists. PLoS ONE, 2021, 16(6):e0244529. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0244529.
16. Yi H. J., Huh S. Korean editors ‘and researchers ‘ experiences with preprints and attitudes towards preprint policies. Science Editing 2021, 8 (1):4–9. DOI 10.6087/kcse.223.
17. Leetvinova N. N., Razumova I. K. Otnoshenie rossii`skogo nauchnogo soobshchestva k otkry`tomu dostupu: 2020. Dva goda spustia // Nauka i nauchnaia informatciia. 2020. 3(4). S. 226–260. DOI 10.24108/2658-3143-2020-3-4-243-277.
18. Shevchenko L. B. Otkry`taia nauka: uchyony`e – «za», a bibliotekari? // Nauchny`e i tekhnicheskie biblioteki. 2023. № 2. S. 113–131. DOI 10.33186/1027-3689-2023-2-113-131.
19. Malai` Iu. N. Otnoshenie k otkry`toi` nauke pol`zovatelei` Zapadno-Sibirskogo mezhregional`nogo nauchno-obrazovatel`nogo centra mirovogo urovnia // Bibliosfera. 2024. № 1. S. 44–57. DOI 10.20913/1815-3186-2024-1-44-57.
20. Karikh R. D. Analiz diskussii na temu otkry`toi` nauki v rossii`skom nauchnom pole // Sotciologiia nauki i tekhnologii`. 2023. № 2. S. 173–193. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/analiz-diskussii-na-temu-otkrytoy-nauki-v-rossiyskomnauchnom-pole (data obrashcheniia: 04.04.2025).
21. Razumova I. K., Leetvinova N. N., Shvartcman M. E., Kuznetcov A. Iu. Otnoshenie rossii`skogo nauchnogo soobshchestva k otkry`tomu dostupu: 2018 g. Analiz rezul`tatov oprosa // Nauka i nauchnaia informatciia. 2018. 1(1). S. 6–21. DOI 10.24108/2658-3143-2018-1-1-6-21.
22. Red`kina N. S. Kul`tura otkry`toi` nauki: mezhdunarodny`e programmy` i platformy` obucheniia // Nauchny`e i tekhnicheskie biblioteki. 2023. № 11. S. 99–120. https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2023-11-99-120.
23. Hahnel M., Smith G., Campbell A. The State of Open Data 2024: Special Report Bridging policy and practice in data sharing. Digital Science. Report. 2024. DOI 10.6084/m9.figshare.27337476.v2.
24. Nature Research, Goodey G. State of Open Data Survey 2022 additional resources. 2022. Figshare. Dataset. DOI 10.6084/m9.figshare.21295422.v1.
25. Redkina N. S. Open Preprint Servers: Current State and Development Prospects // Scientific and Technical Information Processing. 2025. Vol. 52, No. 1. P. 23–30. DOI 10.3103/S0147688224700771.
26. Fitzgerald S. R., Jiang Z. Scholarly Publishing at a Crossroads: Scholarly Perspectives on Open Access. Innov High Educ, 2020, 45: 457–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-020-09508-8.
27. Shevchenko L. B. Bibliotekar` – uchastneyk otkry`togo issledovatel`skogo protcessa // Bibliosfera. 2024. № 4. S. 89–98. DOI 10.20913/1815-3186-2024-4-89-97.
Review
For citations:
Shevchenko L.B. Monitoring of open science perception by Russian researchers. Scientific and Technical Libraries. 2025;(9):102-121. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2025-9-102-121
Views:
126
Email this article 