Choose one activity/consideration of the research process:

Choose another activity/consideration of the research process:

Do you think you can be 'open' at this stage in the research process?

Resolution may possible through collaboration. However, once you commit to being fully open, you may find that the planning stage is somewhat problematic in the context of finding funding sources for the research.

Wider dissemination of the research. If it's useful it may contribute to reputation and finding partners for collaborative endeavours.

Make sure the research outputs are persistently visible and available.

Dissemination and Communication 

By demonstrating good open practice consistently over a long period of time, as an example of how it can be done and how others could participate if they take the plunge.

Some of the research already done before I considered open needs to be reviewed and put in the open.

Showing a track record of data gathering and explaining how it has been gathered will help to engage others in the details being discovered.

Time – I need to spend time going through existing data and putting it into a format which can be effectively shared openly.

In some instances, email conversations are part of the data gathering and I will need to check with correspondents that they are happy for their names to be mentioned online (if not, then the organisation they represent will be the next best reference).

Moving a research project from traditional to open part way through the research period inevitably has an impact on time, however in the long term it will be a big advantage making it open, as the project is briefed with making the research public.

Data could be published as stand alone transcripts or, preferably, a repository where similar data has already been published.

After data has been anonymised, it would be great to share, so that ultimately a large data set could be created from many smaller sets around the same topic.

Challenges to open data include the format, which needs to be accessible to those with whom you intend sharing. And finding or creating a suitable repository for the data.

Review available formats and repositories, and comply to those used most often.

The purpose and consequences of why you would open, or not open, any aspect of your research should be given some thought before you start.

Dissemination and Communication 

By following all guidelines, even the ones that have been there before "open".

Colleagues will know the boundaries you have allowed for the said research.

Good activity. Made me really think about what matters. I guess, it shows in answers.

Not sure... Trust is important. Providing clear guidelines of ethical use of data and based on a specific Creative Commons license perhaps?

Hi, I just added one stage and my thoughts around this. Hope this is ok. I will come back if this would be possible.

Probably yet more openness about the challenges themselves. Actually this makes the research a highly reflective process which is a great way of researching and maintaining process and ethics.

Not all research is the same. I feel that perhaps this course discusses more factual research than the arts, which, while conducted under the same methodologies, is sometimes more a voyage of discovery in art practice. therefore the term data may be much more subjective in an arts research project. Openness in this context may be more self reflective, and is still possible.

The advantages of openness in the arts context would be in articulating thoughts and ideas which may normally remain embedded within practice. I believe that a reflective art practitioner is more able to communicate thoughts in and outside of art practice, and so this would be an advantage in communicating ideas.

The artist researcher may expose their ideas and processes before they are formed or at a vulnerable stage. Some processes get worked through and left behind, and the researcher should feel free to abandon directions which are not effective when the project evolves.

Again, openness about the process itself is an effective strategy. also, I would consider what a video contributor said in the previous unit about being selective about what to publish during a project.

I think the strategy of openness is a direction of travel, but is not an automatic process for everything that happens in a research project.

Several studies have pointed out the difficulties of 100% anonymisation (see Narayan and Felten 2014 for an example) so this particular area concerns me greatly. However, releasing the richest possible data sets could help in ensuring that the research data is used properly and not misrepresented.

By adopting open licenses for final outputs, and also by ensuring that any third-party materials incorporated into the research (graphics, visualisations or data) are likewise openly licensed and thus legally reusable (and possibly remixable and reshareable, if appropriate).

By using open materials, one avoids any potential copyright infringement problems.

Research projects that choose to release their materials under open licenses do need to be aware that their materials can be used in unexpected ways and recombined or remixed into very different final versions. To an extent this is true for closed research outputs as well, but as these are typically limited to academic audiences and under a greater deal of copyright protection, there is a greater level of protection under closed research.

I would ensure that I conduct research ethically by only using materials for which I have legal permission. I would also try and structure any released outputs, including data, in such a way that it cannot be wildly distorted by other users.

Publishing a draft of the initial project on a blog, spreading it around and asking for comments / suggestions.

Broad input on the project's outline, during its very early stages. Possibility of spotting unsuspected loopholes, alternative pathways etc.

Building (and cultivating) a network that can provide rich input for that particular project. Selecting and integrating different recommendations. Risk of someone taking up on your idea and developing it independently.

The first two require intellectual and interpersonal effort (and that includes striving to be helpful when someone asks for your input in a similar situation). The last one requires development of trust, and some level of care in the documentation of your "opening up": you can point to an early blog post as a proof of your originality, if that is ever necessary.

Documenting and openly publishing ethical dilemmas faced or expected in the project. Choosing or establishing an independent body or committee, with established (and openly accessible) rules and procedures to deal with ethical issues.

Can be helpful for future projects (even if not ours). Some ethical issues also seem to be inherently connected to transparency and openness (for instance, when not revealing them is irresponsible or questionable).

There could be many privacy issues related to ethical proceedings. Will data related to ethical committees be anonymized? In which instances, and how? Also, an outside body doesn't always exist, and when it does it isn't always open regarding its rules and procedures.

Dissemination and Communication 

It's possible to be open at the early stages of a research process through communicating about the research from the beginning and sharing the process openly (via Web 2.0 tools and social media for example). Outputs can therefore include a description of the process, methodology, planning documents, survey instruments as well as final findings and reports.

Open communication via Web 2.0 tools and social media at the beginning of a research project can help build awareness of the research as well as inform potential stakeholders, users and those who might be affected or be interested in the report. This can build momentum or interest and support for the research. Feedback and response can help inform further development of the research as well as influence the type of communication and dissemination activities. Furthermore, publication in open access journals and publishing outputs with open licenses extends the reach of the research.

A commitment to open communication and dissemination necessitates thinking about and setting up systems whether it is social media channels, a public website and establishing 'rules' around open communication. It is unlikely that everything about the research process can be made open (for example, early drafts with comments from colleagues in a team), while projects that involve researchers from different counties and institutions may need agree on communication and dissemination that meets their own expectations whether they be cultural or institutional. Another challenge is the time it takes to produce content for and engage with the dialogue and discussions that tend to emanate from social media.

Having a clear strategy for open communication and dissemination and putting systems ad resources in place to facilitate ease of use.

I don't know how possible it is to be open about Evaluation, but sharing how an evaluation might be conducted would be possible (rather than the ongoing of the evaluation as it is happening). The final evaluation on whatever is being evaluated, if shared openly, can give the project more credibility.

The final evaluation on whatever is being evaluated, if shared openly, can give the project more credibility. Feedback on how an evaluation might be conducted may lead to a higher quality of evaluation.

An open evaluation approach may ironically make participants reluctant to be fully open and honest, if they are thinking about the likely consequences or an audience or if there are issues about funding.

Rules for how responses and results may be anonymized or reported by reassure participants. Also, looking at evaluation as a developmental or formative process can assist in approaches to make the evaluation more open, as the evaluation is designed to help the users and participants reflect and improve on their practice.