Having finished selecting my images and describing them below, I thought it worthwhile sharing with any readers that I see each of these images as representing a open science stakeholder's attempt to influence researchers' behavior. That is my phenomenon of interest—particularly when this process is mediated by technology.
Some of the most vocal discontentment regarding open science relates to the reproducibility "crisis" and the individual researchers who have taken it upon themselves to reveal questionable research practices. Such vigilantes (or communities) are who open science resistors call "data thugs" for their bullying. The smile in this selfie suggests the moral certitude of open science advocates, and it can easily be perceived as the smugness open science resistors despise. I chose this photo because it demonstrates conflict and evokes the importance of values to open science and its success.
This image shows an option in an open science web app to make a research object private. I chose this image because it demonstrates that, in this system, the default option is for content to be public. This default is by design, meant to encourage researchers to behave openly. By attempting to structure choices, the system developers are attempting to change how scientific work is done. My dissertation will examine the ways developers and users interact with an open science system and how their values and schemas change and influence that interaction.
This open data badge from the Center for Open Science (https://osf.io/hr67w/) is one of several badges the organization developed. The Center for Open Science (COS) has successfully lobbied for many journals to offer these badges to authors in recognition for their open science practices; authors upload data or materials with their manuscript and their article is then published with this image next to it. Badges have been demonstrated—in work funded and executed by COS—to be effective at encouraging open behaviors (Kidwell et al., 2016: http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002456).