Online Probability Panels (OPPs) have emerged as essential research infrastructures for social sciences, offering robust tools for longitudinal analysis and evidence-based policy-making. However, the growing role of the Open Science movement demands systematic evaluation of their compliance. This study compares major European OPPs—including LISS, GESIS, the GIP, ELIPSS, and the Swedish and Norwegian Citizen Panels—focusing on their practices of openness, recruitment, sampling, and maintenance. Through a qualitative analysis of public documentation and methodological reports, the study examines how their diverse approaches influence data accessibility, inclusivity, and long-term usability. Our findings highlight substantial variability across panels, reflecting the interplay between national contexts, governance models, technological infrastructures, and methodological choices related to recruitment, sampling, and panel maintenance. Some panels demonstrate stronger alignment with Open Science values—promoting transparency, interoperability, and inclusive engagement—while others operate within more constrained frameworks shaped by institutional or structural limitations. This comparative analysis contributes to the understanding of OPPs as evolving knowledge infrastructures and provides a reference framework for future panel development. In doing so, it offers valuable insights for enhancing the role of OPPs in advancing Open and socially engaged research practices
Comparison of Online Probability Panels in Europe: New Trends and Old Challenges in the Era of Open Science
Luciana Taddei
;Dario Germani;Rocco Paolillo;Claudia Pennacchiotti;Ilaria Primerano;Michele Santurro;Loredana Cerbara
2025
Abstract
Online Probability Panels (OPPs) have emerged as essential research infrastructures for social sciences, offering robust tools for longitudinal analysis and evidence-based policy-making. However, the growing role of the Open Science movement demands systematic evaluation of their compliance. This study compares major European OPPs—including LISS, GESIS, the GIP, ELIPSS, and the Swedish and Norwegian Citizen Panels—focusing on their practices of openness, recruitment, sampling, and maintenance. Through a qualitative analysis of public documentation and methodological reports, the study examines how their diverse approaches influence data accessibility, inclusivity, and long-term usability. Our findings highlight substantial variability across panels, reflecting the interplay between national contexts, governance models, technological infrastructures, and methodological choices related to recruitment, sampling, and panel maintenance. Some panels demonstrate stronger alignment with Open Science values—promoting transparency, interoperability, and inclusive engagement—while others operate within more constrained frameworks shaped by institutional or structural limitations. This comparative analysis contributes to the understanding of OPPs as evolving knowledge infrastructures and provides a reference framework for future panel development. In doing so, it offers valuable insights for enhancing the role of OPPs in advancing Open and socially engaged research practices| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
societies-15-00210-v2.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
250.81 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
250.81 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


