Factores clave en la práctica de la Ciencia Abierta. Un análisis multivariado en el contexto universitario

Araya-Pizarro, Sebastián and García-Leal, Héctor Factores clave en la práctica de la Ciencia Abierta. Un análisis multivariado en el contexto universitario. Información, cultura y sociedad, 2025, n. 52, pp. 119-138. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[thumbnail of ICS52a07.pdf]
Preview
 Text
ICS52a07.pdf
Download (622kB) | Preview

English abstract

This study analyzes the perception and practice of open science within the university context, aiming to identify the key factors of its adoption. Employing a quantitative approach, the study utilized a survey as a data collection technique administered to 106 professionals engaged in research activities at a Latin American university (Chile). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques, association tests, and multivariate analysis (binary logistic regression and K-means algorithm). Results revealed that the willingness to engage in open science is strongly influenced by knowledge, interest, and educational level, and moderately by the participant’s role. Three user segments were identified: indifferent, potential, and committed. Additionally, it was found that women and novice researchers exhibit greater interest in learning about the construct, with its practice predominantly observed in the field of sciences. It is concluded that fostering open science practices requires establishing specific institutional policies, developing open data repositories and reports, providing training in data management plans, and disseminating the benefits of open science, thereby contributing to the advancement of shared knowledge and academic and social progress within the community.

['eprint_fieldopt_linguabib_' not defined] abstract

Este estudio analiza la percepción y práctica de la ciencia abierta en el contexto universitario, con el propósito de identificar los factores determinantes de su adopción. El estudio, de enfoque cuantitativo, utilizó como técnica de recolección de datos una encuesta aplicada a 106 profesionales que desarrollan labores de investigación en una universidad latinoamericana (Chile). Los datos fueron analizados mediante técnicas estadísticas descriptivas, pruebas de asociación y análisis multivariante (regresión logística binaria y algoritmo K-medias). Los resultados revelaron que la disposición para practicar la ciencia abierta está fuertemente influenciada por el conocimiento, el interés y el nivel educativo, y moderadamente por el rol del participante. Se identificaron tres segmentos de usuarios: indiferentes, potenciales y comprometidos. También, se halló que las mujeres e investigadores nóveles muestran mayor interés en aprender sobre el constructo, y que su práctica es predominante en el campo de las ciencias. Se concluye que para fomentar la práctica de la ciencia abierta es crucial establecer políticas institucionales específicas, desarrollar repositorios de datos e informes abiertos, proporcionar capacitación en planes de gestión de datos y difundir las ventajas de la ciencia abierta, lo que contribuirá al avance del conocimiento compartido y el progreso académico y social de la comunidad.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Ciencia abierta, Investigador, Universidad, Análisis multivariante, Chile, Open Science, Researcher, University, Multivariate analysis, Chile
Subjects: D. Libraries as physical collections. > DD. Academic libraries.
L. Information technology and library technology
Depositing user: Graciela Giunti
Date deposited: 03 Jul 2025 01:10
Last modified: 03 Jul 2025 01:10
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/46964

References

Abele-Brehm, Andrea, Mario Gollwitzer, Ulf Steinberg y Felix Schönbrodt. 2019. Attitudes Toward Open Scienceand Public Data Sharing. En Social Psychology. Vol. 50, no. 4, 252–260. <https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000384>

Ahmed, Mahfooz, Roslina Othman, Mohamad Fauzan Noordin, Muhd Zulfadli Hafiz bin Ismail, Zulkarnain bin Abd Karim y Sharifah Nazeera Binti Syed Anera. 2024. Understanding factors influencing the adoption of open science practices among Malaysia’s NIH researchers. En Information Development. Vol. 0, no. 0. <https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241248145>

Alessandroni, Nicolás y Krista Byers-Heinlein. 2022. Ten Strategies to Foster Open Science in Psychology and Beyond. En Collabra: Psychology. Vol. 8, no. 1, 1–16. <https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.57545>

Allagnat, Ludivine, Stephane Berghmans, Holly J. Falk-Krzesinski, Shereen Hanafi, Rachel Herbert, Sarah Huggett y Stacey Tobin. 2017. Gender in the Global Research Landscape. Elsevier B.V. <https://ses.sp.bvs.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ElsevierGenderReport_final_for-web.pdf> [Consulta: 3 enero 2023]

Allen, Christopher y David M.A. Mehler. 2019. Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. En PLoS Biology. Vol. 17, no. 5, e3000246. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246>

Armeni, Kristijan, Loek Brinkman, Rickard Carlsson, Anita Eerland, Rianne Fijten, Robin Fondberg, Vera E. Heininga, Stephan Heunis, Wei Qi Koh, Maurits Masselink, Niall Moran, Andrew Ó Baoill, Alexandra Sarafoglou, Antonio Schettino, Hardy Schwamm, Zsuzsika Sjoerds, Marta Teperek, Olmo R van den Akker, Anna van’t Veer, Raul Zurita-Milla. 2021. Towards wide-scale adoption of open science practices: The role of open science communities. En Science and Public Policy. Vol. 48, no. 5, 605–611. <https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scab039>

Arza, Valeria y Mariano Fressoli. 2017. Systematizing benefits of open science practices. En Information Services and Use. Vol. 37, no. 4, 463–474. <https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-170861>

Caballero-Rivero, Alejandro, Nancy Sánchez-Tarragó y Raimundo Nonato Mac Edo Dos Santos. 2019. Open science practices of the Brazilian academic community: A study based on scientific production. En Transinformacao. Vol. 31, e19002. <https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e190029>

Cardoso, Sonia y Teresa Carvalho. 2023. ‘Men are from Mars, and Women are from Venus’? Doctoral Students’ Perspectives on Doctoral Education. En International Conference on Gender Research. Vol. 6, no. 1, 74–81.

<https://doi.org/10.34190/icgr.6.1.988>

Ciriminna, Rosaria y Mario Pagliaro. 2023. Open Science in Italy: Lessons Learned en Route to Opening Scholarship. En European Review. Vol. 31, no. 6, 647–661. <https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798723000121>

Costa, Michelli Pereira da y Fernando César Lima Leite. 2019. Factors influencing research data communication on Zika virus: a grounded theory. En Journal of Documentation. Vol. 75, no. 5, 910–926. <https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-05-2018-0071>

Curty, Renata Gonçalves, Kevin Crowston, Alison Specht, Bruce W. Grant y Elizabeth D. Dalton. 2017. Attitudes and norms affecting scientists’ data reuse. En PLoS ONE. Vol. 12, no. 12, 1–22. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189288>

Dijk, Wilhelmina van, Christopher Schatschneider y Sara A. Hart. 2021. Open Science in Education Sciences. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Vol. 54, no. 2, 139–152. <https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420945267>

Enke, Neela, Anne Thessen, Kerstin Bach, Jörg Bendix, Bernhard Seeger y Birgit Gemeinholzer. 2012. The user’s view on biodiversity data sharing - Investigating facts of acceptance and requirements to realize a sustainable use of research data -. En Ecological Informatics. Vol. 11, 25–33. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2012.03.004>

Escobar-Jiménez, Christian. 2022. Doctores, incentivos de titulación e impacto en la investigación: un panorama general de los profesores con doctorado en el sistema ecuatoriano de educación superior. En Revista Andina de Educación. Vol. 5, no. 2, 000528. <https://doi.org/10.32719/26312816.2022.5.2.8>

Fecher, Benedikt, Sascha Friesike y Marcel Hebing. 2015. What drives academic data sharing? En PLoS ONE. Vol. 10, no. 2, 1–25. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118053>

Ferguson, Joel, Rebecca Littman, Garret Christensen, Elizabeth Levy Paluck, Nicholas Swanson, Zenan Wang, Edward Miguel, David Birke y John-Henry Pezzuto. 2023. Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences. En Nature Communications. no. 14, 5401. <https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-41111-1>

Fernández, Manuela. 2022. Open science for private interests? How the logic of open science contributes to the commercialization of research. En Revista de Economia Institucional. Vol. 24, no. 47, 179–201.

<https://doi.org/10.18601/01245996.v24n47.08>

Finol, Lorayne. 2023. Paradoja datos abiertos-privacidad como preámbulo de la política de acceso abierto a la información científica. En Gobierno y Administración Pública. Vol. 5, no. enero-julio, 40–64. <https://doi.org/10.29393/GP5-3PDLF10003>

Fishbein, Martin y Icek Ajzen. 2010. Predicting Changing Behavior. The Reasoned Action Approach. New York: Psychology Press.

Fressoli, Mariano y Valeria Arza. 2018. Los desafíos que enfrentan las prácticas de ciencia abierta. Teknokultura. En Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales. Vol. 15, no. 2, 429–448. <https://doi.org/10.5209/tekn.60616>

Joo, Soohyung, Sujin Kim y Youngseek Kim. 2017. An exploratory study of health scientists’ data reuse behaviors: examining attitudinal, social, and resource factors. En The Eletronic Library. Vol. 69, no. 4, 389–407.

<https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-12-2016-0201>

Kim, Youngseek y Seungahn Nah. 2018. Internet researchers’ data sharing behaviors: An integration of data reuse experience, attitudinal beliefs, social norms, and resource factors. En Online Information Review, Vol. 42, no. 1, 124-142. <https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-10-2016-0313>

Klebel, Thomas , Vincent Traag, Ioanna Grypari, Lennart Stoy y Tony Ross-Hellauer. 2025. The academic impact of Open Science: a scoping review. En Royal Society Open Science.12241248. <http://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.241248>

Laguna-Camacho, Antonio. 2023. Ciencia abierta: iniciativas para mejorar la investigación en Latinoamérica. En CIENCIA Ergo-Sum. Vol. 30, no. 1. <https://doi.org/10.30878/ces.v30n1a11>

Magallanes, Mariana, Hernán Morero, Alejandra Moreno y Juan Gabriel Vélez. 2023. El rol de la Universidad en la ciencia abierta. En Integración y Conocimiento, Vol. 12, no. 2, 90–116. <https://doi.org/10.61203/2347-0658.v12.n2.42037>

Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (UNESCO). 2021. Recomendación de la UNESCO sobre la Ciencia Abierta. París: UNESCO. <https://doi.org/10.54677/YDOG4702> [Consulta: 10 diciembre 2023].

Pande, Mandaar y Vijayakumar Bharathi. 2020. Theoretical foundations of design thinking – A constructivism learning approach to design thinking. En Thinking Skills and Creativity. Vol. 36, 1–17. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100637>

Pardo, Clara y Alexander Cotte. 2018. Knowledge and perceptions of open science among researchers-a case study for Colombia. En Information (Switzerland). Vol. 9, no. 11, 1–19. <https://doi.org/10.3390/info9110292>

Ramírez, Paola Andrea y Daniel Samoilovich. 2021. Ciencia Abierta en América Latina. París: UNESCO. [Consulta: 10 diciembre 2023].

Roche, Dominique, Rose E. O’Dea, Kecia Kerr, Trina Rytwinski, Richard Schuster, Vivian Nguyen, Nathan Young, Joseph Bennett y Steven Cooke. 2021. Closing the knowledge-action gap in conservation with open science. En Conservation Biology. Vol. 36, no. 3, e13835. <https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13835>

Ryan, Richard y Edward Deci. 2020. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. En Contemporary Educational Psychology. Vol. 61, 1–11. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860>

Sayogo, Djoko Sigit y Theresa A. Pardo. 2013. Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: Understanding the motivation to publish research data. En Government Information Quarterly. Vol. 30, S19–S31.

<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.011>

Schmidt, Birgit, Birgit Gemeinholzer y Andrew Treloar. 2016. Open data in global environmental research: The Belmont Forum’s open data survey. En PLoS ONE. Vol. 11, no. 1, 1–29. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146695>

Segado-Boj, Francisco, Juan Martín-Quevedo y Juan José Prieto-Gutiérrez. 2018. Attitudes toward open access, open peer review, and altmetrics among contributors to Spanish scholarly journals. En Journal of Scholarly Publishing. Vol. 50, no. 1, 48–70. <https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.50.1.08>

Silverstein, Priya, Charlotte Pennington, Peter Branney, Daryl O’Connor, Emma Lawlor, Emer O’Brien y Dermot Lynott. 2024. A registered report survey of open research practices in psychology departments in the UK and Ireland. En British Journal of Psychology. Vol. 115, no. 3, 497–534. <https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12700>

Song, Hyunjin, David M. Markowitz y Samuel Hardman Taylor. 2022. Trusting on the shoulders of open giants? Open science increases trust in science for the public and academics. En Journal of Communication. Vol. 72, no. 4, 497–510. <https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqac017>

Tenopir, Carol, Suzie Allard, Kimberly Douglass, Arsev Umur Aydinoglu, Lei Wu, Eleanor Read, Maribeth Manoff y Mike Frame. 2011. Data sharing by scientists: Practices and perceptions. En PLoS ONE. Vol. 6, no. 6, 1–21. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021101>

Turcan, Nelly, Gheorghe Cuciureanu, Rodica Cujba, Viorica Lupu, Natalia Cheradi y Igor Cojocaru. 2022. Perception of Open Science in the Scientific Community of the Republic of Moldova. En Postmodern Openings. Vol. 13, no. 4, 294–334. <https://doi.org/10.18662/po/13.4/519>

Zuiderwijk, Anneke, Rhythima Shinde y Wei Jeng. 2020. What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption. En PLoS ONE. Vol. 15, e0239283. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239283>

Zuiderwijk, Anneke y Helen Spiers. 2019. Sharing and re-using open data: A case study of motivations in astrophysics. En International Journal of Information Management. Vol. 49, no. 5, 228–241.

<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.024>


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS