Can open science speak qualitative? Rearticulating open science vocabulary for qualitative research

‘Open research’ (or ‘open science’) has substantially reshaped conversations surrounding rigor, transparency, and accountability, yet its vocabulary remains largely rooted in quantitative, positivist paradigms. Terms such as reproducibility, replicability, and generalisability are routinely treated as universal markers of research quality, despite their limited epistemological compatibility with many qualitative methodologies. While qualitative scholars have long articulated the limitations this, the rapid emergence of the open research movement creates a new context to synthesise and translate these ideas. Drawing on established traditions and debates, we propose a rearticulation of open research terminology that better reflects interpretive logics and methodological pluralism of many qualitative approaches. Specifically, we advocate for concepts such as ‘traceability’ to replace ‘reproducibility’, ‘transferability’ rather than ‘generalisability’, and ‘dependability’ instead of ‘replicability’. Such an argument is not new, but rather connects existing qualitative scholarship with emerging conversations about language appropriateness to envision a more inclusive and epistemically just vision of openness.