{"id":641,"date":"2008-04-24T20:31:46","date_gmt":"2008-04-24T18:31:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.mandyschiefner.ch\/blog\/archives\/1198"},"modified":"2008-04-24T20:31:46","modified_gmt":"2008-04-24T18:31:46","slug":"web-20-fits-so-perfectly-with-the-way-science-works","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/web-20-fits-so-perfectly-with-the-way-science-works\/","title":{"rendered":"„Web 2.0 fits so perfectly with the way science works“"},"content":{"rendered":"

Web 2.0 ist so langsam in der Wissenschaft angekommen zu sein. Nach diversen Debatten in verschiedenen Blogs (vgl. hier<\/a>) bin ich heute durch George Siemens auf einen Artikel des scientific american aufmerksam geworden: Science 2.0 — Is Open Access Science the Future? Is posting raw results online, for all to see, a great tool or a great risk?<\/a>.
\nDarin heisst es unter anderem:<\/p>\n

A small but growing number of researchers (and not just the younger ones) have begun to carry out their work via the wide-open tools of Web 2.0. And although their efforts are still too scattered to be called a movement\u00e2\u20ac\u201dyet\u00e2\u20ac\u201dtheir experiences to date suggest that this kind of Web-based \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Science 2.0\u00e2\u20ac\u009d is not only more collegial than traditional science but considerably more productive.<\/p>\n

(…)<\/p>\n

Critiquing, suggesting, sharing ideas and data\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthis communication is the heart of science, the most powerful tool ever invented for correcting errors, building on colleagues\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 work and fashioning new knowledge. Although the classic peer-reviewed paper is important, says Surridge, who publishes a lot of them, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re effectively just snapshots of what the authors have done and thought at this moment in time. They are not collaborative beyond that, except for rudimentary mechanisms such as citations and letters to the editor.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Aber schon seit jeher gibt es vor allem in der Wissenschaft auch Vorbehalte gegen zu viel \u00c3\u2013ffentlichkeit:<\/p>\n

Of course, many scientists remain wary of such openness\u00e2\u20ac\u201despecially in the hypercompetitive biomedical fields, where patents, promotion and tenure can hinge on being the first to publish a new discovery. For these practitioners, Science 2.0 seems dangerous: putting your serious work out on blogs and social networks feels like an open invitation to have your lab notebooks vandalized\u00e2\u20ac\u201dor, worse, your best ideas stolen and published by a rival.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Dennoch stehen wir hier meiner Meinung nach noch ganz am Anfang. Wie viele Doktoranden schlagen sich mit Verlagsangeboten herum, wenn sie auch noch Open Access ver\u00c3\u00b6ffentlichen wollen? Wie geht man denn mit dem Ver\u00c3\u00b6ffentlichen von Gedanken im Blog um, die vielleicht von anderen „geklaut“ werden k\u00c3\u00b6nnen? Kann man Blogs zitieren?
\nIch denke aber, Web 2.0 in der Wissenschaft ist wichtig, denn es bringt die Wissenschaft so nochmals ein St\u00c3\u00bcck in die Gesellschaft zur\u00c3\u00bcck. Schliesslich werden Forschende von der Gesellschaft f\u00c3\u00bcr ihr Forschen bezahlt, also sollte die Gesellschaft auch Einblick darin haben, was mit diesem Geld geschieht.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Web 2.0 ist so langsam in der Wissenschaft angekommen zu sein. Nach diversen Debatten in verschiedenen Blogs (vgl. hier) bin ich heute durch George Siemens auf einen Artikel des scientific american aufmerksam geworden: Science 2.0 — Is Open Access Science the Future? Is posting raw results online, for all to see, a great tool or […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-641","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-mandyschiefner"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/641","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=641"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/641\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=641"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=641"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2headz.ch\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=641"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}