Open Science, Closed Doors? Countering Marginalization through an Agenda for Ethical, Inclusive Research in Communication

Abstract

The open science (OS) movement has advocated for increased transparency in certain aspects of research. Communication is taking its first steps toward OS as some journals have adopted OS guidelines codified by another discipline. We find this pursuit troubling as OS prioritizes openness while insufficiently addressing essential ethical principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Some recommended open science practices increase the potential for harm for marginalized participants, communities, and researchers. We elaborate how OS can serve a marginalizing force within academia and the research community, as it overlooks the needs of marginalized scholars and excludes some forms of scholarship. We challenge the current instantiation of OS and propose a divergent agenda for the future of Communication research centered on ethical, inclusive research practices.

Open Science Knowledge Production: Addressing Epistemological Challenges and Ethical Implications

“…Additionally, it has been pointed out that "[d]espite ethical codes urging researchers to focus on participant needs and potential harms, the OS movement focuses on the benefits of transparency and efficiency for researchers, rarely mentioning associated participant risk" [62] In particular, it is pointed out that there is a lack of sensitivity to the "potential for harm for marginalized participants, communities, and researchers" and that OS conveys and reinforces "cultural values of its creators (competition, capitalism)" [62]. The important point is to take into account unforeseen and reinforcing side effects of well-intended measures.…”

“…On a more practical level, it has been pointed out that informed consent can be difficult to respect in an OS setting [49,62] as it can be challenging to have the knowledge and information about future data use. The same goes for the return of research results.…”

Theory Development and Evaluation Within a Critical Media Effects Framework

“…It is vital that social science researchers be intentionally inclusive with regard to how empirical investigation is performed within media psychology (e.g., Fox et al, 2021). Much of the research in this domain is undertaken with the aim of bringing greater awareness to potentially concerning mediated phenomena or to promote prosocial media-related outcomes (e.g., Riles, Behm-Morawitz et al., 2020).…”

Leave no one behind: challenges and opportunities for equity and diversity for marine journals in the 21st century

“…Secondly, many learned society journals such as the JMBA exist to promote a specific discipline and be an inclusive voice for those who work within the discipline not only on a global scale but across a range of individuals from Early Career Researchers (ECRs) to retirees and those working outside of institutes with dedicated OA funding pots. It is also possible therefore that Open Access publishing 'creates inequity and makes publishing inaccessible to many marginalized researchers' (Fox et al, 2021).…”