The Benefits of Sharing—Nice Guys and Girls do Finish First - Open-Source Lab: How to Build Your Own Hardware and Reduce Research Costs - page 14

(discussed in detail below). All these trends hurt scientific communication and directly
hamper innovation and progress.
Although this is common knowledge in academia, academics have learned and are accus-
tomed to the system. Thus, it may be tempting to some research labs to learn all they can
about making less expensive and more customizable research equipment using the method
and sources described in the next several chapters, make the equipment they need and get on
with their research following the standard relatively closed model. However, if you do this,
you will miss out on the primary benefits of using the open-source method. There are five ex-
tremely valuable benefits to aggressively sharing your own protocols, methods, and hardware
back into the open-source scientific community:
1. massive peer-review in the development of background material and experimental design,
which leads to
2. improved experimental design and hardware design (often for radically lower costs), which
provides higher performance equipment,
3. increased visibility, citations and public relations, which leads to
4. increased funding opportunities and improved student recruitment, and
5. improved student research-related training and education.
In the sections below, we explore each benefit in detail.
In order to take advantage of these benefits, it is important to understand the ethic behind
open-source philosophy. This ethic was developed first by computer programmers working
on free and open-source software (FOSS). Through principles of sharing and open access,
open-source development treats users as developers by encouraging contribution, recognizing
good work through peer approval, and propagating superior code [ 4 ] . This philosophy of the
open-source movement is described by Levy as the “hacker ethic” with the following general
principles [ 5 ]:
1. Sharing
2. Openness
3. Decentralization
4. Free access
5. World improvement.
This philosophy is enabled by the gift culture of open source, in which recognition of an in-
dividual is determined by the amount of knowledge given away [ 6 ] . In this system, the richer
you are, the more you give; the more valuable the gift, the more respect you gain . This type of philo-
sophy should be familiar to many in academia, which has also historically followed a gift cul-
ture, which rewards contributors through a process of peer review. We share our brilliance at
professional conferences and through articles in the literature, and gain respect. The more you
give away and the more valuable it is scientiically, the beter is your career. In the academy,
knowledge is our currency not money. Can we do more? We will explore ways to more ag-
gressively share and harvest the rewards from each benefit of using open-source approaches
to research in the following subsections.

2.1.1 Pre peer-review in the development of background

material and experimental design
Between 1998 and 2013, my research groups have experimented with progressively more ag-
gressive sharing of research ideas before they are put into practice. The degree to which your
laboratory can commit to openness will depend on the field and your institution's rules.
However, the evidence now is fairly well established that it would benefit every field to be