Frontiers | Collaborative Processes in Science and Literature: an In-Depth Look at the Cases of CERN and SIC | Research Metrics and Analytics

Abstract:  In this paper we examine how the process of collaboration works in science and literature. In the first part, we discuss the features of scientific collaboration and literary collaboration and the differences between them. In the second part, we analyze two processes of collaboration, each from a different field: the case of CERN and high-energy physics and the case of Scrittura Industriale Collettiva and its Great Open Novel. Lastly, we try to compare those two processes and deduce the common traits of a successful collaboration.


As new venues for peer review flower, will journals catch up? – Psychonomic Society Featured Content

“Given that preprints are here to stay, the field should be devoting resources to getting them certified more quickly as having received some amount of expert scrutiny. This is particularly important, of course, for preprints making claims relevant to the response to the pandemic.

In many cases, one component of this certification is already happening very quickly. More publicly-available peer review is happening today than ever before – just not at our journals. While academic journals typically call on half a handful of hand-picked, often reluctant referees, social media is not as limiting, and lively expert discussions are flourishing at forums like Twitter, Pubpeer, and the commenting facility of preprint servers.

So far, most journals have simply ignored this. As a result, science is now happening on two independent tracks, one slow, and one fast. The fast track is chaotic and unruly, while the slow track is bureaucratic and secretive – at most journals the experts’ comments never become available to readers, and the resulting evaluation by the editor of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript are never communicated to readers….

Will we need to reinvent the scientific journal wheel, or will legacy journals catch up with the modern world, by both taking advantage of and adding value to the peer review that is happening on the fast track?”


OPERAS-GER: Vermittler zwischen europäischen und deutschen Forschungsinfrastrukturen (OPERAS-GER: Intermediary between European and German research infrastructures) |

(translated via

Initiative for Open Access and Open Scholarly Communication in the Social Sciences and Humanities begins work The National Contact Point OPERAS-GER – a cooperation between OPERAS and the Max Weber Foundation – has started its work. The new service is intended to anchor the services and resources for science communication in the social sciences and humanities provided by OPERAS at the European level in the German science landscape and to create intensive networking between the research infrastructures of the EU and Germany. Further goals are to strengthen Open Science and promote the FAIR principles. As part of the OPERAS-GER project, the Max Weber Foundation, which has already been committed to Open Access in the social sciences and humanities since 2017, is planning a series of online seminars and lectures as well as application-oriented workshops for the new services starting in June 2021. The project is based at the Max Weber Institute’s office and will be funded by the Federal Ministry of Research and Education (BMBF) from October 2020, initially for three years. OPERAS (Open Scholarly Communication In The European Research Area For Social Sciences And Humanities) provides infrastructural services for research institutions, libraries and publishers that serve to better organise research activities and make research results more visible in the sense of Open Science. The Max Weber Foundation – German Humanities Institutes Abroad promotes research with a focus on the fields of history, cultural studies, economics and social sciences in selected countries with the aim of improving mutual understanding. It maintains ten institutes, other research groups and offices worldwide and provides infrastructures for research in the humanities and social sciences. Source:

Middle Ages for Educators website brings Princeton scholarship to an international audience

“The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about rapid innovations in distance learning and the wide adoption of digital tools. For many educators, however, having the capability to teach virtually is not the same as having digital-ready content.

“When the pandemic began, there was the realization that everyone was going to be on Zoom, but you shouldn’t teach online the same way you teach in person,” said Merle Eisenberg, a recent postgraduate research associate in history, who graduated from Princeton with a Ph.D. in 2018 and is now a postdoctoral fellow at the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center at the University of Maryland.

To make these lessons come alive for students, Eisenberg, together with medieval scholars Sara McDougall, an associate professor of history at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and the City University of New York Graduate Center, and Laura Morreale, chair of the digital humanities and multimedia committee of the Medieval Academy of America, decided to develop materials that high school and college educators could use in a virtual setting.

The resources they created became so popular so quickly that they needed a permanent home for them and greater technical support to meet the demand. The result is a new website, Middle Ages for Educators (MAFE), featuring short video lectures by world-renowned experts, translated primary sources, workshops on how to use digital tools to study the medieval past, and curated links to websites with medieval content….”

2021 Open Scholarship Awards – Electronic Textual Cultures Lab

“For 2021, we are pleased to be able to award 2 Open Scholarship Awards and 2 Emerging Open Scholarship Awards, as well as a number of honourable mentions in each category.

Open Scholarship Awards (2021), for open scholarship carried out by scholars, librarians, citizen scholars, research professionals, and administrators.


Doran Larson (Hamilton C), American Prison Writing Archive
Gretchen Arnold (St. Louis U), Nuisance Laws and Battered Women

Honourable Mentions:

Kathryn Starkey (Stanford U), Mae Velloso-Lyons (Stanford U), Danny Smith (Stanford U), and Quinn Dombrowski (Stanford U), Global Medieval Sourcebook
Mark Turin (U British Columbia), Digital Himalaya Project
Visionary Futures Collective, COVID-19 Response Tracker
Sara Humphreys (U Victoria), contributions to Why Write? A Guide for Students in Canada

Emerging Open Scholarship Awards (2021), for open scholarship carried out by undergraduate students, graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and early stage professionals.


Eric Gonzaba (California State U, Fullerton) and Amanda Regan (Southern Methodist U), Mapping the Gay Guides
Alix Shield (Simon Fraser U), contribution to The People and the Text

Honourable Mentions:

Chelsea A. M. Gardner (Acadia U), Sabrina C. Higgins (Simon Fraser U), Melissa Funke (U Winnipeg), Megan J. Daniels (U British Columbia), Carolyn M. Laferrière (U Southern California), and Christine L. Johnston (Western Washington U), Peopling the Past
Jonathan Reeve (Columbia U), Open Editions
Sarah Zhang (Simon Fraser U Library) and Allan Cho (U British Columbia Library), Hacking the Historical Data: Register of Chinese Immigrants to Canada, 1886-1949

Open scholarship incorporates open access, open data, open education, and other related movements that have the potential to make scholarly work more efficient, more accessible, and more usable by those within and beyond the academy. By engaging with open practices for academic work, open scholarship shares that work more broadly and more publicly….”

PsyArXiv Preprints | The Pandemic as a Portal: Reimagining Psychological Science as Truly Open and Inclusive

Abstract:  Psychological science is at an inflection point: The COVID-19 pandemic has already begun to exacerbate inequalities that stem from our historically closed and exclusive culture. Meanwhile, reform efforts to change the future of our science are too narrow in focus to fully succeed. In this paper, we call on psychological scientists—focusing specifically on those who use quantitative methods in the United States as one context in which such a conversation can begin—to reimagine our discipline as fundamentally open and inclusive. First, we discuss who our discipline was designed to serve and how this history produced the inequitable reward and support systems we see today. Second, we highlight how current institutional responses to address worsening inequalities are inadequate, as well as how our disciplinary perspective may both help and hinder our ability to craft effective solutions. Third, we take a hard look in the mirror at the disconnect between what we ostensibly value as a field and what we actually practice. Fourth and finally, we lead readers through a roadmap for reimagining psychological science in whatever roles and spaces they occupy, from an informal discussion group in a department to a formal strategic planning retreat at a scientific society.


Full article: To share or not to share – 10 years of European Journal of Psychotraumatology

Abstract:  The European Journal of Psychotraumatology, owned by the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS), launched as one of the first full Open Access ‘specialist’ journals in its field. Has this Open Access model worked in how the Journal has performed? With the European Journal of Psychotraumatology celebrating its ten-year anniversary we look back at the past decade of sharing our research with the world and with how the journal sits with the broader movement beyond Open Access to Open Research and we present new policies we have adopted to move the field of psychotraumatology to the next level of Open Research. While we as researchers now make our publications more often freely available to all, how often do we share our protocols, our statistical analysis plans, or our data? We all gain from more transparency and reproducibility, and big steps are being made in this direction. The journal’s decennial performance as well as the exciting new Open Research developments are presented in this editorial. The journal is no longer in its infancy and eager to step into the next decade of Open Research.