Search results

This study investigates the multifaceted barriers and facilitators affecting research data sharing across the research data lifecycle. It aims to broaden the understanding of data sharing beyond the publication phase, emphasizing the continuous nature of data sharing from generation to reuse.

Employing a mixed-methods approach, the study integrates the Theory of Planned Behavior, the Technology Acceptance Model, and the Institutional Theory to hypothesize the influence of various factors on data sharing behaviors across the lifecycle. A questionnaire survey and structural equation modeling are utilized to empirically test these hypotheses.

This study identifies critical factors influencing data sharing at different lifecycle stages, including perceived behavioral control, perceived effort, journal and funding agency pressures, subjective norms, perceived risks, resource availability, and perceived benefits. The findings highlight the complex interplay of these factors and their varying impacts at different stages of data sharing.

This study illuminates the dynamics of research data sharing, offering insights while recognizing its scope might not capture all disciplinary and cultural nuances. It highlights pathways for stakeholders to bolster data sharing, suggesting a collaborative push towards open science, reflecting on how strategic interventions can bridge existing gaps in practice.

This study offers actionable recommendations for policymakers, journals, and institutions to foster a more conducive environment for data sharing, emphasizing the need for support mechanisms at various lifecycle stages.

This study contributes to the literature by offering a comprehensive model of the research data lifecycle, providing empirical evidence on the factors influencing data sharing across this continuum.

The focus of this chapter is the intersection of social media, publication, data sharing, and research ethics. By now there is an extensive literature on the use of social media in research. There is also excellent work on challenges of postpublication sharing of social media, primarily focused on legal restrictions, technical infrastructure, and documentation. This chapter attempts to build upon and extend this work by using cases to deepen the analysis of ethical issues arising from publishing and sharing social media data. Publishing will refer to the presentation of data extracts, aggregations, or summaries, while sharing refers to the practice of making the underlying data available postpublication for others to use. It will look at the ethical questions that arise both for researchers (or others) sharing data, and those who are using data that has been made available by others, emphasizing the inherently relational nature of data sharing. The ethical challenges researchers face when considering sharing user-generated content collected from social media platforms are the focus of the cases. The chapter begins by summarizing the general principles of research ethics, then identifies the specific ethical challenges from sharing social media data and positions these challenges in the context of these general principles. These challenges are then analyzed in more detail with cases from research projects that drew upon several different genres of social media. The chapter concludes with some recommendations for practical guidance and considers the future of ethical practice in sharing social media data.

Prior studies identified a need for further comparison of data-sharing practices across different disciplines and communities. Toward addressing this need, the purpose of this paper is to examine the data-sharing practices of the earthquake engineering (EE) community, which could help inform data-sharing policies in EE and provide different stakeholders of the EE community with suggestions regarding data management and curation.

This study conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 16 EE researchers to gain an understanding of which data might be shared, with whom, under what conditions and why; and their perceptions of data ownership.

This study identified 29 data-sharing factors categorized into five groups. Requirements from funding agencies and academic genealogy were frequent impacts on EE researchers’ data-sharing practices. EE researchers were uncertain of data ownership and their perceptions varied.

Based on the findings, this study provides funding agencies, research institutions, data repositories and other stakeholders of the EE community with suggestions, such as allowing researchers to adjust the timeframe they can withhold data based on project size and the amount of experimental data generated; expanding the types and states of data required to share; defining data ownership in grant requirements; integrating data sharing and curation into curriculum; and collaborating with library and information schools for curriculum development.

One of the currently debated changes in scientific practice is the implementation of data sharing requirements for peer-reviewed publication to increase transparency and intersubjective verifiability of results. However, it seems that data sharing is a not fully adopted behavior among researchers. The theory of planned behavior was repeatedly applied to explain drivers of data sharing from the perspective of data donors (researchers). However, data sharing can be viewed from another perspective as well: survey participants. The research questions (RQs) for this study were as follows: 1 Does data sharing increase participant's nonresponse? 2 Does data sharing influence participant's response behavior? The purpose of this paper is to address these issues.

To answer the RQs, a mixed methods approach was applied, consisting of a qualitative prestudy and a quantitative survey including an experimental component. The latter was a two-group setup with an intervention group (A) and a control group (B). A list-based recruiting of members of the Medical Faculty of the University of Freiburg was applied for 15 days. For exploratory data analysis of dropouts and nonresponse, we used Fisher's exact tests and binary logistic regressions.

In sum, we recorded 197 cases for Group A and 198 cases for Group B. We found no systematic group differences regarding response bias or dropout. Furthermore, we gained insights into the experiences our sample made with data sharing: half of our sample already requested data of other researchers or shared data on request of other researchers. Data repositories, however, were used less frequently: 28% of our respondents used data from repositories and 19% stored data in a repository.

To the authors’ knowledge, their study is the first study that includes researchers as survey subjects investigating the effect of data sharing on their response patterns.

As an important aspect of the scientific process, research data sharing is the practice of making data used for scholarly research publicly available for use by other researchers. This paper seeks to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the data-sharing challenges and opportunities posed by the data deluge in academics. An attempt is made to discuss implications for the changing role and functioning of academic libraries.

An extensive review of literature on current trends and the impact of data sharing is performed.

The context in which the increasing demands for data sharing have arisen is presented. Some of the practices, trends, and issues central to data sharing among academics are presented. Emerging implications for academic libraries that are expected to provide a data service are discussed.

An insightful review and synthesis of context, issues, and trends in data sharing will help academic libraries to plan and develop programs and policies for their data services.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how scientists’ prior data-reuse experience affects their data-sharing intention by updating diverse attitudinal, control and normative beliefs about data sharing.

This paper used a survey method and the research model was evaluated by applying structural equation modelling to 476 survey responses from biological scientists in the USA.

The results show that prior data-reuse experience significantly increases the perceived community and career benefits and subjective norms of data sharing and significantly decreases the perceived risk and effort involved in data sharing. The perceived community benefits and subjective norms of data sharing positively influence scientists’ data-sharing intention, whereas the perceived risk and effort negatively influence scientists’ data-sharing intention.

Based on the theory of planned behaviour, the research model was developed by connecting scientists’ prior data-reuse experience and data-sharing intention mediated through diverse attitudinal, control and normative perceptions of data sharing.

This research suggests that to facilitate scientists’ data-sharing behaviours, data reuse needs to be encouraged. Data sharing and reuse are interconnected, so scientists’ data sharing can be better promoted by providing them with data-reuse experience.

This is one of the initial studies examining the relationship between data-reuse experience and data-sharing behaviour, and it considered the following mediating factors: perceived community benefit, career benefit, career risk, effort and subjective norm of data sharing. This research provides an advanced investigation of data-sharing behaviour in the relationship with data-reuse experience and suggests significant implications for fostering data-sharing behaviour.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the impact of scientific data in order to assess the reliability of data to support data curation, to establish trust between researchers to support reuse of digital data and encourage researchers to share more data.

The authors compared the correlations between usage counts of associated data in Dryad and citation counts of articles in Web of Science in different subject areas in order to assess the possibility of using altmetric indicators to evaluate scientific data.

There are high positive correlations between usage counts of data and citation counts of associated articles. The citation counts of article’s shared data are higher than the average citation counts in most of the subject areas examined by the authors.

The paper suggests that usage counts of data could be potentially used to evaluate scholarly impact of scientific data, especially for those subject areas without special data repositories.

The study examines the possibility to use usage counts to evaluate the impact of scientific data in a generic repository Dryad by different subject categories.

Research data publishing is today widely regarded as crucial for reproducibility, proper assessment of scientific results, and as a way for researchers to get proper credit for sharing their data. However, several challenges need to be solved to fully realize its potential, one of them being the development of a global standard for links between research data and literature. Current linking solutions are mostly based on bilateral, ad hoc agreements between publishers and data centers. These operate in silos so that content cannot be readily combined to deliver a network graph connecting research data and literature in a comprehensive and reliable way. The Research Data Alliance (RDA) Publishing Data Services Working Group (PDS-WG) aims to address this issue of fragmentation by bringing together different stakeholders to agree on a common infrastructure for sharing links between datasets and literature. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper presents the synergic effort of the RDA PDS-WG and the OpenAIRE infrastructure toward enabling a common infrastructure for exchanging data-literature links by realizing and operating the Data-Literature Interlinking (DLI) Service. The DLI Service populates and provides access to a graph of data set-literature links (at the time of writing close to five million, and growing) collected from a variety of major data centers, publishers, and research organizations.

To achieve its objectives, the Service proposes an interoperable exchange data model and format, based on which it collects and publishes links, thereby offering the opportunity to validate such common approach on real-case scenarios, with real providers and consumers. Feedback of these actors will drive continuous refinement of the both data model and exchange format, supporting the further development of the Service to become an essential part of a universal, open, cross-platform, cross-discipline solution for collecting, and sharing data set-literature links.

This realization of the DLI Service is the first technical, cross-community, and collaborative effort in the direction of establishing a common infrastructure for facilitating the exchange of data set-literature links. As a result of its operation and underlying community effort, a new activity, name Scholix, has been initiated involving the technological level stakeholders such as DataCite and CrossRef.

This survey-based study aims to explore the research data dissemination and requesting practices of Arab researchers. It investigates the reasons, types, methods, barriers and motivations associated with data sharing and requesting in the Arab research community.

A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 205 Arab researchers representing various disciplines and career stages. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.

The study found that 91.2% of Arab researchers share data, while 56.6% access data from others. Reasons for sharing include promoting transparency and collaboration while requesting data is driven by the need to validate findings and explore new research questions. Processed/analysed data and survey/questionnaire data are the most commonly shared and requested types.

This study contributes to the literature by examining data sharing and requesting practices in the Arab research community. It provides original insights into the motivations, barriers and data types shared and requested by Arab researchers. This can inform future research and initiatives to promote regional data sharing.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-06-2023-0283

The implications and impacts of the educational intelligent economy from the vantage point of digital frontierism is explored using a decolonial framework, with a specific focus on Big Data and data sharing in Comparative and International Education (CIE). Recent debates are reviewed about CIE’s past histories and its current directions to tease out their implications for data sharing. The authors demonstrate how data sharing continues to reinforce imperialism through control, dissemination, and application of data, and how electronic and digital colonialism preserve current intellectual and structural hegemonies. Then, we give an example of how donors and funding agencies, including the National Science Foundation, engage in neoliberal scientism and control of data, and how it affects the future of social sciences, including CIE. Our inquiry is at the intersections of economic intelligence and educational intelligence in a rapidly evolving technocentric, data-dominated, and networked economy. The authors demonstrate how educational intelligence in the global economy may exacerbate the asymmetric access to data between the global North and the South, as educational data are increasingly becoming global commodities to be traded between various public and private actors. Finally, the authors argue that decolonial participatory research designs that aim at positive, sustained transformations, as opposed to the stagnancy of Big Data and data mining, should be used to address the problems inherent to the Educational Intelligent Economy.