Perceived Risk and Barriers to Open and Responsible Research Across Fifteen UK Universities
- 1The University of Manchester
Abstract
Open research practices are increasingly promoted to improve research transparency, reproducibility, accessibility, and societal impact. Despite growing support from research funders, institutions, and policy initiatives, adoption remains uneven across disciplines and research communities. This study examined perceived risks and barriers associated with 14 FORRT Guideline areas using qualitative responses from the UK Reproducibility Network Open and Transparent Research Practices Survey (N = 2,567), conducted across 15 UK higher education institutions. Free-text responses describing risks and barriers were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. A total of 3,951 relevant comments generated 3,433 coded references to barriers and risks. Three interconnected clusters emerged. Individual concerns included lack of motivation, fear of losing intellectual credit, and concerns about exposing mistakes and criticism. Systemic and institutional barriers included lack of time and resources, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient training and support, lack of incentives and recognition, unclear guidance, disciplinary and methodological challenges, and tensions between open practices and intellectual property requirements. Ethical and quality-related concerns included risks to participant confidentiality and privacy, challenges associated with sensitive data, concerns about inappropriate application of open research practices across different research traditions, perceived impacts on research quality and innovation, and potential effects on public trust in research. Lack of time and resources was the most frequently reported barrier. Across responses, barriers were commonly described as interdependent, with shortcomings in funding, infrastructure, institutional support, incentives, and training reinforcing one another. Respondents largely supported the principles underpinning open research but highlighted substantial practical, professional, and ethical challenges to implementation. These findings suggest that increasing open research adoption requires more than policy mandates or awareness-raising activities. Sustainable uptake will depend on aligned incentives, adequate infrastructure and support, recognition of methodological diversity, and approaches that enable openness to be implemented responsibly across different research contexts.
Related
- From data neglect to data respect: A framework for institutionalising a sustainable research data management culture in Kenyan universities
- Perceived facilitators and barriers influencing lifestyle modification among adults with cardiovascular disease attending a cardiac clinic at a referral hospital in northern Tanzania: An exploratory qualitative study
- Climate change adaptation in India: a systematic review of adaptation strategies, factors, impacts, barriers, and future research directions
- Exploratory Insights into Barriers and Open Practices for Computational Reproducibility in Scientific Research
- Ten simple rules for responsible use of AI and LLMs in computational biology
BibTeX
@misc{bonn2026perceived,
title = {{Perceived Risk and Barriers to Open and Responsible Research Across Fifteen UK Universities}},
author = {N. Aubert Bonn and A. J. Stewart and L. Hughes-Noehrer},
howpublished = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.04.746981},
url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.04.746981v1},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Perceived Risk and Barriers to Open and Responsible Research Across Fifteen UK Universities
AU - N. Aubert Bonn
AU - A. J. Stewart
AU - L. Hughes-Noehrer
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/04
PB - bioRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.09.04.746981
UR - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.04.746981v1
AB - Open research practices are increasingly promoted to improve research transparency, reproducibility, accessibility, and societal impact. Despite growing support from research funders, institutions, and policy initiatives, adoption remains uneven across disciplines and research communities. This study examined perceived risks and barriers associated with 14 FORRT Guideline areas using qualitative responses from the UK Reproducibility Network Open and Transparent Research Practices Survey (N = 2,567), conducted across 15 UK higher education institutions. Free-text responses describing risks and barriers were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. A total of 3,951 relevant comments generated 3,433 coded references to barriers and risks. Three interconnected clusters emerged. Individual concerns included lack of motivation, fear of losing intellectual credit, and concerns about exposing mistakes and criticism. Systemic and institutional barriers included lack of time and resources, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient training and support, lack of incentives and recognition, unclear guidance, disciplinary and methodological challenges, and tensions between open practices and intellectual property requirements. Ethical and quality-related concerns included risks to participant confidentiality and privacy, challenges associated with sensitive data, concerns about inappropriate application of open research practices across different research traditions, perceived impacts on research quality and innovation, and potential effects on public trust in research. Lack of time and resources was the most frequently reported barrier. Across responses, barriers were commonly described as interdependent, with shortcomings in funding, infrastructure, institutional support, incentives, and training reinforcing one another. Respondents largely supported the principles underpinning open research but highlighted substantial practical, professional, and ethical challenges to implementation. These findings suggest that increasing open research adoption requires more than policy mandates or awareness-raising activities. Sustainable uptake will depend on aligned incentives, adequate infrastructure and support, recognition of methodological diversity, and approaches that enable openness to be implemented responsibly across different research contexts.
ER -