Open science practices
Open science extends what this pack does for software to the whole
research workflow: materials, data, analysis plans, manuscripts
and reviews, open by default and closed only with reasons. For an
agent the job is concrete plumbing, not advocacy: set up the
platforms, wire the links between artifacts, and make each
openness claim verifiable. The payoff structure is worth stating
when relevant: preregistration protects claims from hindsight,
preprints establish priority and speed feedback, open materials
earn reuse and citations - openness is self-interest aligned with
integrity.
The OSF project as the hub
The Open Science Framework (osf.io, run by the Center for Open
Science) is the general-purpose spine for open projects:
- Structure: one OSF project per study, with components for
materials, data, analysis code and preregistration; connect the
code repository rather than copying it (OSF links forges;
the repository stays the working home -
rseng-version-control-review).
- Every component gets a persistent identifier and citation; wire
these into the paper and the repository README so artifacts
reference each other both ways (the same both-ways discipline
as rseng-archiving).
- Access control is per-component: public materials next to
embargoed data next to private drafts is a normal shape - "as
open as possible, as closed as necessary", with reasons stated
(rseng-regulatory-compliance governs the closed parts).
- OSF has a REST API; bulk setup and link auditing are
scriptable when a lab runs many projects.
Preregistration
A preregistration is a frozen, timestamped analysis plan filed
BEFORE the data is seen - the strongest cheap defense against
hindsight bias, and increasingly expected in several fields:
- File it on OSF's registration system (or a domain registry);
once registered it is immutable - that is the point.
- The plan should be code-shaped where possible: hypotheses,
exact variables, exclusion rules, models and inference criteria
- ideally with the analysis script itself attached, run on
simulated or pilot data (rseng-reproducibility's discipline
applied before data collection; power-analysis code belongs
here too).
- Deviations happen legitimately: the practice is to REPORT them
as deviations with reasons, not to hide them - preregistration
separates confirmatory from exploratory, it does not forbid
exploration.
- Registered Reports go further: peer review of the plan before
results exist, with in-principle acceptance - suggest the
format when the field's journals offer it.
Preprints
- Deposit at submission time (arXiv-class or domain servers;
ASAPbio documents the landscape and journal policies) - a DOI'd
preprint establishes priority and makes the work citable
months or years early.
- Check the target journal's preprint policy first (most allow
it; a few constrain versions) and use the journal's own
checking where unsure.
- Link the chain: preprint to published version (servers support
the link; OpenAlex tracks it - rseng-citation-hygiene uses this
when verifying references), and both to the OSF project, data
and code DOIs. The linked cluster IS the open research object.
- Versioned preprints are normal; update after major revisions
so readers land on current claims.
Open peer review and open participation
- When venues offer open review, the practices from
rseng-software-peer-review transfer: constructive, specific,
evidence-based - with a name on it.
- Review artifacts too: data and code review during peer review
(CODECHECK-style execution) is open science applied to the
evidence layer (rseng-software-peer-review,
rseng-research-integrity).
- Community review of preprints (public comments, review
platforms) counts as scholarly contribution; encourage
recording it (ORCID records review activity).
Keeping openness claims honest
Before submission or reporting, audit the claims: "data available
at X" resolves and matches (rseng-archiving's verify step),
"preregistered" links to the actual registration and deviations
are reported, "code available" points at a tagged, licensed,
citable release (rseng-publishing-releasing, rseng-licensing,
rseng-citation-metadata). The open-science story is the sum of
verifiable links - and AI contributions to any of it are declared
in aidecl.yaml (rseng-ai-declaration).
Working with this skill
This skill is source-independent: its authority is the OSF and
Center for Open Science documentation and ASAPbio resources linked
below. It is the
researcher-workflow face of what rseng-fair-software,
rseng-reproducibility and rseng-archiving provide at the artifact
level.
Learn more (verified):
Related skills
Check whether any of these applies before moving on:
- rseng-archiving - both-ways artifact linking discipline
- rseng-citation-hygiene - preprint-to-published version drift
- rseng-publishing-releasing - citable code release behind claims
- rseng-regulatory-compliance - governs the closed components
- rseng-research-integrity - preregistration deviations reported honestly
- rseng-software-peer-review - open review practices transfer
1---2name: rseng-open-science-practices3description: Covers the researcher-facing open science workflow: setting up OSF projects that link materials, data, code and registrations, preregistering studies and analysis plans, depositing preprints and linking them to published versions, participating in open peer review, and choosing openness levels honestly. Use when the user mentions open science, OSF, preregistration, registered reports or preprints, wants their research process (not just the software) open, asks where to preregister or preprint, or when a project's openness claims should become verifiable practice.4license: CC-BY-4.05---67# Open science practices89Open science extends what this pack does for software to the whole10research workflow: materials, data, analysis plans, manuscripts11and reviews, open by default and closed only with reasons. For an12agent the job is concrete plumbing, not advocacy: set up the13platforms, wire the links between artifacts, and make each14openness claim verifiable. The payoff structure is worth stating15when relevant: preregistration protects claims from hindsight,16preprints establish priority and speed feedback, open materials17earn reuse and citations - openness is self-interest aligned with18integrity.1920## The OSF project as the hub2122The Open Science Framework (osf.io, run by the Center for Open23Science) is the general-purpose spine for open projects:2425- Structure: one OSF project per study, with components for26 materials, data, analysis code and preregistration; connect the27 code repository rather than copying it (OSF links forges;28 the repository stays the working home -29 rseng-version-control-review).30- Every component gets a persistent identifier and citation; wire31 these into the paper and the repository README so artifacts32 reference each other both ways (the same both-ways discipline33 as rseng-archiving).34- Access control is per-component: public materials next to35 embargoed data next to private drafts is a normal shape - "as36 open as possible, as closed as necessary", with reasons stated37 (rseng-regulatory-compliance governs the closed parts).38- OSF has a REST API; bulk setup and link auditing are39 scriptable when a lab runs many projects.4041## Preregistration4243A preregistration is a frozen, timestamped analysis plan filed44BEFORE the data is seen - the strongest cheap defense against45hindsight bias, and increasingly expected in several fields:4647- File it on OSF's registration system (or a domain registry);48 once registered it is immutable - that is the point.49- The plan should be code-shaped where possible: hypotheses,50 exact variables, exclusion rules, models and inference criteria51 - ideally with the analysis script itself attached, run on52 simulated or pilot data (rseng-reproducibility's discipline53 applied before data collection; power-analysis code belongs54 here too).55- Deviations happen legitimately: the practice is to REPORT them56 as deviations with reasons, not to hide them - preregistration57 separates confirmatory from exploratory, it does not forbid58 exploration.59- Registered Reports go further: peer review of the plan before60 results exist, with in-principle acceptance - suggest the61 format when the field's journals offer it.6263## Preprints6465- Deposit at submission time (arXiv-class or domain servers;66 ASAPbio documents the landscape and journal policies) - a DOI'd67 preprint establishes priority and makes the work citable68 months or years early.69- Check the target journal's preprint policy first (most allow70 it; a few constrain versions) and use the journal's own71 checking where unsure.72- Link the chain: preprint to published version (servers support73 the link; OpenAlex tracks it - rseng-citation-hygiene uses this74 when verifying references), and both to the OSF project, data75 and code DOIs. The linked cluster IS the open research object.76- Versioned preprints are normal; update after major revisions77 so readers land on current claims.7879## Open peer review and open participation8081- When venues offer open review, the practices from82 rseng-software-peer-review transfer: constructive, specific,83 evidence-based - with a name on it.84- Review artifacts too: data and code review during peer review85 (CODECHECK-style execution) is open science applied to the86 evidence layer (rseng-software-peer-review,87 rseng-research-integrity).88- Community review of preprints (public comments, review89 platforms) counts as scholarly contribution; encourage90 recording it (ORCID records review activity).9192## Keeping openness claims honest9394Before submission or reporting, audit the claims: "data available95at X" resolves and matches (rseng-archiving's verify step),96"preregistered" links to the actual registration and deviations97are reported, "code available" points at a tagged, licensed,98citable release (rseng-publishing-releasing, rseng-licensing,99rseng-citation-metadata). The open-science story is the sum of100verifiable links - and AI contributions to any of it are declared101in aidecl.yaml (rseng-ai-declaration).102103## Working with this skill104105This skill is source-independent: its authority is the OSF and106Center for Open Science documentation and ASAPbio resources linked107below. It is the108researcher-workflow face of what rseng-fair-software,109rseng-reproducibility and rseng-archiving provide at the artifact110level.111112Learn more (verified):113 - https://osf.io - Open Science Framework114 - https://www.cos.io - Center for Open Science115 - https://www.cos.io/initiatives/prereg - preregistration116 guidance117 - https://asapbio.org - ASAPbio preprint resources118 - https://orcid.org - ORCID researcher identifiers119120<!-- related-skills:begin -->121122## Related skills123124Check whether any of these applies before moving on:125126- rseng-archiving - both-ways artifact linking discipline127- rseng-citation-hygiene - preprint-to-published version drift128- rseng-publishing-releasing - citable code release behind claims129- rseng-regulatory-compliance - governs the closed components130- rseng-research-integrity - preregistration deviations reported honestly131- rseng-software-peer-review - open review practices transfer132133<!-- related-skills:end -->
fdiblen