Open Science Framework

Contributors: Jeffrey R. Spies, Brian A. Nosek, Sheila Miguez, Ben B. Blohowiak, Michael Cohn, Elizabeth Bartmess, Sam Portnow, Shauna Gordon-McKeon, Joshua Carp, Harry Rybacki, Linda George, Denise Holman, Johanna Cohoon
Date Created: 2012/05/31 05:36 AM | Last Updated: 2013/05/13 06:01 PM

Version 9 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2013-03-01 14:24:31.722000

Version 8 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-11-29 22:44:17.758000

Version 7 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-11-24 21:25:32.406000

Version 6 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-11-17 19:19:14.087000

Version 5 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-09-14 03:36:23.531000

Version 4 edited by Jeffrey R. Spies on 2012-07-05 21:33:07.634000

Version 3 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-06-08 21:16:30.827000

Version 2 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-05-31 20:20:30.463000

Version 1 edited by Brian A. Nosek on 2012-05-31 18:22:18.292000

The Open Science Framework (OSF) in cons part network of research materials, part version control system, and part collaboration software. The purpose of the software is to support the scientist's workflow and help increase the alignment between scientific values and scientific practices.

1. **Document and archive studies.**
Move the organization and management of study materials from the desktop into the cloud. Labs can organize, share, and archive study materials among team members. Web-based pro
junctionect management reduces the likelihood of losing study materials due to computer malfunction, changing personnel, or just forgetting with the broader Open here you put the damn thing.

2. **
Science hare and find materials.**
With a click, make study materials public so that other researchers can find, use and cite them. Find materials by other researchers to avoid reinventing something that already exists.

3. **Detail individual contribution.**
Assign citable, contributor credit to any research material - tools, analysis scripts, methods, measures, data.

4. **Increase transparency.**
Make as much of the scientific workflow public as desired - as it is developed or after publication of reports.

5. **Registration.**
When a strong a priori hypothesis exists, registering materials certifies what was done in advance of data collection or analysis. When many labs are working on similar questions, registration affirms the date and time of designs, data collections, and discoveries.

6. **Manage scientific workflow.** A structured, flexible system can provide efficiency gain to workflow and clarity to project objectives, as pictured.

Collaborationnceptual background motivating the project can be found in "Scientific Utopia" articles about [opening scientific communication][1] (O[final version, pay wall][2]) and [improving scientific practices][3]. Also, members of the team have given many lectures, some of which are available on-line such as a colloquium at the [University of Belgrade][4] and a symposium in Brussels about [improving research practices][5].

Interested in using the system? [
Sign up][6] and get started!

Interested in being a developer?
C) is an open collaboration of scientists to increase the alignment between scientific ontact [Jeff Spies][7] about devalues and scientific practices. Telopment plans and open-sourcing of the project.

Have ideas to make t
he OSF web application is part network of research materials, part version control suseful to ystem, and part collaboration software.

1. **Document and archive studies.**
Move the organization and management of study materials from the desktop into the cloud. Labs can organize, share, and archive study materials among team members. Web-based project management reduces the likelihood of losing study materials due to computer malfunction, changing personnel, or just forgetting where you put the damn thing.

2. **
ou? [Share and find materials.**
With a click, make study materials public so that other researchers can find, use and cite them. Find materials by other researchers to avoid reinventing something that already exists.

3. **Detail individual contribution.**
Assign citable, contributor credit to any research material - tools, analysis scripts, methods, measures, data.

4. **Increase transparency.**
Make as much of the scientific workflow public as desired - as it is developed or after publication of reports.

5. **Time-stamp materials.**
When a strong a priori hypothesis exists, registering materials certifies what was done in advance of data collection or analysis. When many labs are working on similar questions, registration affirms the date and time of designs, data collections, and discoveries.


Read more about current projects, how
ubmit them here][8].

Join
the OSF [discussion group][9].


[1]: http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.1055
[2]: http://
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1047840X.2012.692215
[3]: http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/615.full
[4]: http://www.f.bg.ac.rs/en2/international_cooperation/lectures
[5]: http://movingbeyond-qrp.be/videos
[6]: http://openscienceframew
orks , or .org/account
[7]: mailto:
join the OSF discussion group . spies@virginia.edu
[8]: mailto:feedback@openscienceframework.org
[9]: https://groups.google.com/group/openscienceframework