Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines : a theory-based survey of journal editors
© 2023 The Authors..
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.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:10 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Royal Society open science - 10(2023), 2 vom: 25. Feb., Seite 221093 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Naaman, Kevin [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Behaviour change |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 29.03.2023 published: Electronic-eCollection figshare: 10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6403446 Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1098/rsos.221093 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM352659033 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM352659033 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226054232.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1098/rsos.221093 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1175.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM352659033 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36756061 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Naaman, Kevin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Exploring enablers and barriers to implementing the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines |b a theory-based survey of journal editors |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 29.03.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a figshare: 10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6403446 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2023 The Authors. | ||
| 520 | |a 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 | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Top Guidelines | |
| 650 | 4 | |a behaviour change | |
| 650 | 4 | |a journal editors | |
| 650 | 4 | |a open science | |
| 650 | 4 | |a reproducibility | |
| 650 | 4 | |a transparency | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Grant, Sean |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kianersi, Sina |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Supplee, Lauren |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Henschel, Beate |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mayo-Wilson, Evan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Royal Society open science |d 2014 |g 10(2023), 2 vom: 25. Feb., Seite 221093 |w (DE-627)NLM24986214X |x 2054-5703 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:10 |g year:2023 |g number:2 |g day:25 |g month:02 |g pages:221093 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.221093 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 10 |j 2023 |e 2 |b 25 |c 02 |h 221093 | ||