scholarly journals A survey of funders’ and institutions’ needs for understanding researchers’ open research practices

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
Lauren Cadwallader
Keyword(s):  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Personal Contact ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Current State ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Level Of Satisfaction ◽  
Funding Agencies

A growing number of research-performing organisations (institutions) and funding agencies have policies that support open research practices -- sharing of research data, code and software. However, funders and institutions lack sufficient tools, time or resources to monitor compliance with these policies.To better understand funder and institution needs related to understanding open research practices of researchers, we targeted funders and institutions with a survey in 2020 and received 122 completed responses. Our survey assessed and scored, (from 0-100), the importance of and satisfaction with 17 factors associated with understanding open research practices. This includes things such as knowing if a research paper includes links to research data in a repository; knowing if a research grant made code available in a public repository; knowing if research data were made available in a reusable form; and knowing reasons why research data are not publicly available. Half of respondents had tried to evaluate researchers’ open research practices in the past and 78% plan to do this in the future. The most common method used to find out if researchers are practicing open research was personal contact with researchers and the most common reason for doing it was to increase their knowledge of researchers’ sharing practices (e.g. determine current state of sharing; track changes in practices over time; compare different departments/disciplines). The results indicate that nearly all of the 17 factors we asked about in the survey were underserved. The mean importance of all factors to respondents was 71.7, approaching the 75 threshold of “very important”. The average satisfaction of all factors was 41.3, indicating a negative level of satisfaction with ability to complete these tasks. The results imply an opportunity for better solutions to meet these needs.The growth of policies and requirements for making research data and code available does not appear to be matched with solutions for determining if these policies have been complied with. We conclude that publishers can better support some of the needs of funders and institutions by introducing simple solutions such as:-Mandatory data availability statements (DAS) in research articles -Not permitting generic “data available on request” statements-Enabling and encouraging the use of data repositories and other methods that make data available in a more reusable way-Providing visible links to research data on publications-Making information available on data and code sharing practices in publications available to institutions and funding agencies-Extending policies that require transparency in sharing of research data, to sharing of code

scholarly journals A survey of researchers' needs and priorities for data sharing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
James Harney ◽  
Lauren Cadwallader
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Reuse ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Share Data ◽  
Do So

PLOS has long supported Open Science. One of the ways in which we do so is via our stringent data availability policy established in 2014. Despite this policy, and more data sharing policies being introduced by other organizations, best practices for data sharing are adopted by a minority of researchers in their publications. Problems with effective research data sharing persist and these problems have been quantified by previous research as a lack of time, resources, incentives, and/or skills to share data. In this study we built on this research by investigating the importance of tasks associated with data sharing, and researchers’ satisfaction with their ability to complete these tasks. By investigating these factors we aimed to better understand opportunities for new or improved solutions for sharing data. In May-June 2020 we surveyed researchers from Europe and North America to rate tasks associated with data sharing on (i) their importance and (ii) their satisfaction with their ability to complete them. We received 728 completed and 667 partial responses. We calculated mean importance and satisfaction scores to highlight potential opportunities for new solutions to and compare different cohorts.Tasks relating to research impact, funder compliance, and credit had the highest importance scores. 52% of respondents reuse research data but the average satisfaction score for obtaining data for reuse was relatively low. Tasks associated with sharing data were rated somewhat important and respondents were reasonably well satisfied in their ability to accomplish them. Notably, this included tasks associated with best data sharing practice, such as use of data repositories. However, the most common method for sharing data was in fact via supplemental files with articles, which is not considered to be best practice.We presume that researchers are unlikely to seek new solutions to a problem or task that they are satisfied in their ability to accomplish, even if many do not attempt this task. This implies there are few opportunities for new solutions or tools to meet these researcher needs. Publishers can likely meet these needs for data sharing by working to seamlessly integrate existing solutions that reduce the effort or behaviour change involved in some tasks, and focusing on advocacy and education around the benefits of sharing data. There may however be opportunities - unmet researcher needs - in relation to better supporting data reuse, which could be met in part by strengthening data sharing policies of journals and publishers, and improving the discoverability of data associated with published articles.

scholarly journals DataverseNO: A National, Generic Repository and its Contribution to the Increased FAIRness of Data from the Long Tail of Research

Ravnetrykk ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Conzett
Keyword(s):  
Open Source Software ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Long Tail ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Research Organizations ◽  
Digital Objects ◽  
Organizational Features

Research data repositories play a crucial role in the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) ecosystem of digital objects. DataverseNO is a national, generic repository for open research data, primarily from researchers affiliated with Norwegian research organizations. The repository runs on the open-source software Dataverse. This article presents the organization and operation of DataverseNO, and investigates how the repository contributes to the increased FAIRness of small and medium sized research data. Sections 1 to 3 present background information about the FAIR Data Principles (section 1), how FAIR may be turned into reality (section 2), and what these principles and recommendations imply for data from the so-called long tail of research, i.e. small and medium-sized datasets that are often heterogenous in nature and hard to standardize (section 3). Section 4 gives an overview of the key organizational features of DataverseNO, followed by an evaluation of how well DataverseNO and the repository application Dataverse as such support the FAIR Data Principles (section 5). Section 6 discusses how sustainable and trustworthy the repository is. The article is rounded up in section 7 by a brief summary including a look into the future of the repository.

scholarly journals Open Data Policies among Library and Information Science Journals

Publications ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Brian Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Data Archiving ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Public Data

Journal publishers play an important role in the open research data ecosystem. Through open data policies that include public data archiving mandates and data availability statements, journal publishers help promote transparency in research and wider access to a growing scholarly record. The library and information science (LIS) discipline has a unique relationship with both open data initiatives and academic publishing and may be well-positioned to adopt rigorous open data policies. This study examines the information provided on public-facing websites of LIS journals in order to describe the extent, and nature, of open data guidance provided to prospective authors. Open access journals in the discipline have disproportionately adopted detailed, strict open data policies. Commercial publishers, which account for the largest share of publishing in the discipline, have largely adopted weaker policies. Rigorous policies, adopted by a minority of journals, describe the rationale, application, and expectations for open research data, while most journals that provide guidance on the matter use hesitant and vague language. Recommendations are provided for strengthening journal open data policies.

scholarly journals Perceptions and Attitudes toward Data Sharing among Dental Researchers

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Spallek ◽  
S.M. Weinberg ◽  
M. Manz ◽  
S. Nanayakkara ◽  
X. Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
International Association ◽  
Improve Patient Care ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Share Data ◽  
Past Experiences

Introduction: Increasing attention is being given to the roles of data management and data sharing in the advancement of research. This study was undertaken to explore opinions and past experiences of established dental researchers as related to data sharing and data management. Methods: Researchers were recruited from the International Association for Dental Research scientific groups to complete a survey consisting of Likert-type, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. Results: All 42 respondents indicated that data sharing should be promoted and facilitated, but many indicated reservations or concerns about the proper use of data and the protection of research subjects. Many had used data from data repositories and received requests for data originating from their studies. Opinions varied regarding restrictions such as requirements to share data and the time limits of investigator rights to keep data. Respondents also varied in their methods of data management and storage, with younger respondents and those with higher direct costs of their research tending to use dedicated experts to manage their data. Discussion: The expressed respondent support for research data sharing, with the noted concerns, complements the idea of developing managed data clearinghouses capable of promoting, managing, and overseeing the data-sharing process. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Researchers can use the results of this study to evaluate and improve management and sharing of research data. By encouraging and facilitating the data-sharing process, research can advance more efficiently, and research findings can be implemented into practice more rapidly to improve patient care and the overall oral health of populations.

scholarly journals The State of Dissemination of Open Research Data in Ukraine and the World: Bibliometric Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-217
Author(s):  
Anton Boiko ◽  
Olha Kramarenko ◽  
Sardar Shabanov
Keyword(s):  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Data Exchange ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
The State ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Open Research ◽  
The World ◽  
Data Files

Purpose: To determine the current state of development of open science in the paradigm of open research data in Ukraine and the world, as well as to analyze the representation of Ukraine in the world research space, in terms of research data exchange. Design / Method / Research Approach: Methods of synthesis, logical and comparative analysis used to determine the dynamics of the number of research data journals and data files in the world, as well as to quantify the share of research data repositories in Ukraine and the world. Trend and bibliometric analysis were used to determine the share of publications with their open primary data; analysis of their thematic structures; identification of the main scientific clusters of such publications; research of geographic indicators and share of publications by research institutions. Findings: The study found a tendency to increase both the number of data logs and data files in Dryad (open data repository). The results of the analysis of the share of data repositories indexed in re3data (register of research data repositories) show that 51% of the total number are repositories of data from European countries, with Germany leading with 460 repositories, followed by the United Kingdom (302 repositories) and France (116 repositories). Ukraine has only 2 data repositories indexed in re3data. The trend of relevance of data exchange is confirmed by the increase of publications with datasets for the last 10 years (2011-2020) in 5 times. Research institutions and universities are the main sources of research data, which are mainly focused on the fields of knowledge in chemistry (23.3%); biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology (13.8%); medicine (12.9%). An analysis of the latest thematic groups formed on the basis of publications with datasets shows that there is a significant correlation between publications with open source data and COVID-19 studies. More than 50% of publications with datasets both in Ukraine and around the world are aimed at achieving the goal of SDG 3 Good Health. Theoretical Implications: It is substantiated that in Ukraine there is a need to implement specific tactical and strategic plans for open science and open access to research data. Practical Implications: The results of the study can be used to support decision-making in the management of research data at the macro and micro levels. Future Research: It should be noted that the righteous bibliometric analysis of the state of the dissemination of data underlying the research results did not include the assessment of quality indicators and compliance with the FAIR principles, because accessibility and reusability are fundamental components of open science, which may be an area for further research. Moreover, it is advisable to investigate the degree of influence of the disclosure of the data underlying the research result on economic indicators, as well as indicators of ratings of higher education, etc. Research Limitations: Since publications with datasets in Scopus-indexed journals became the information base of the analysis for our study, it can be assumed that the dataset did not include publications with datasets published in editions that the Scopus bibliographic database does not cover. Paper type: Theoretical

scholarly journals Open Data and Open Access Articles: Exploring Connections in the Life Sciences

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Williams
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Data Bank ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Current State

Objectives: This small-scale study explores the current state of connections between open data and open access (OA) articles in the life sciences. Methods: This study involved 44 openly available life sciences datasets from the Illinois Data Bank that had 45 related research articles. For each article, I gathered the OA status of the journal and the article on the publisher website and checked whether the article was openly available via Unpaywall and Research Gate. I also examined how and where the open data was included in the HTML and PDF versions of the related articles. Results: Of the 45 articles studied, less than half were published in Gold/Full OA journals, and while the remaining articles were published in Gold/Hybrid journals, none of them were OA. This study found that OA articles pointed to the Illinois Data Bank datasets similarly to all of the related articles, most commonly with a data availability statement containing a DOI. Conclusions: The findings indicate that Gold OA in hybrid journals does not appear to be a popular option, even for articles connected to open data, and this study emphasizes the importance of data repositories providing DOIs, since the related articles frequently used DOIs to point to the Illinois Data Bank datasets. This study also revealed concerns about free (not licensed OA) access to articles on publisher websites, which will be a significant topic for future research.

scholarly journals Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leho Tedersoo ◽  
Rainer Küngas ◽  
Ester Oras ◽  
Kajar Köster ◽  
Helen Eenmaa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Share Data ◽  
Bonus Points

AbstractData sharing is one of the cornerstones of modern science that enables large-scale analyses and reproducibility. We evaluated data availability in research articles across nine disciplines in Nature and Science magazines and recorded corresponding authors’ concerns, requests and reasons for declining data sharing. Although data sharing has improved in the last decade and particularly in recent years, data availability and willingness to share data still differ greatly among disciplines. We observed that statements of data availability upon (reasonable) request are inefficient and should not be allowed by journals. To improve data sharing at the time of manuscript acceptance, researchers should be better motivated to release their data with real benefits such as recognition, or bonus points in grant and job applications. We recommend that data management costs should be covered by funding agencies; publicly available research data ought to be included in the evaluation of applications; and surveillance of data sharing should be enforced by both academic publishers and funders. These cross-discipline survey data are available from the plutoF repository.

Introduction: Archiving Qualitative Data in Practice: Ethical Feedback

2021 ◽  
Vol 150 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-27
Author(s):  
Pablo Diaz
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
The Past ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
The Cost

Over the past twenty years the normative framework that underpins social science research has undergone major shifts. Among the most salient changes is the growing incentive to archive, share and reuse research data. Today, many governments, funding agencies, research infrastructures and editors are pushing what is commonly known as Open Research Data (ORD). By reflecting on concrete experiences of data sharing, the different contributions to this issue point to the ethical challenges posed by this new trend. Through a fine objectivation of the archiving work, they call to take distance from the bureaucratic framework imposed by the new ethics and ORD policies and to think of data sharing as a situated, contextual and dynamic process. The cost of the exercise as well as the sensitivity of certain data and subjects suggest opting for flexible approaches that leave a certain autonomy and freedom of appraisal to researchers.

scholarly journals Qualitative Data Sharing: Data Repositories and Academic Libraries as Key Partners in Addressing Challenges

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 643-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Mannheimer ◽  
Amy Pienta ◽  
Dessislava Kirilova ◽  
Colin Elman ◽  
Amber Wutich
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Big Data ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Federal Funding ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Funding Agencies

Data sharing is increasingly perceived to be beneficial to knowledge production, and is therefore increasingly required by federal funding agencies, private funders, and journals. As qualitative researchers are faced with new expectations to share their data, data repositories and academic libraries are working to address the specific challenges of qualitative research data. This article describes how data repositories and academic libraries can partner with researchers to support three challenges associated with qualitative data sharing: (1) obtaining informed consent from participants for data sharing and scholarly reuse, (2) ensuring that qualitative data are legally and ethically shared, and (3) sharing data that cannot be deidentified. This article also describes three continuing challenges of qualitative data sharing that data repositories and academic libraries cannot specifically address—research using qualitative big data, copyright concerns, and risk of decontextualization. While data repositories and academic libraries cannot provide easy solutions to these three continuing challenges, they can partner with researchers and connect them with other relevant specialists to examine these challenges. Ultimately, this article suggests that data repositories and academic libraries can help researchers address some of the challenges associated with ethical and lawful qualitative data sharing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document