scholarly journals Is There a Social Life in Open Data? The Case of Open Data Practices in Educational Technology Research

Publications ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliana Raffaghelli ◽  
Stefania Manca
Keyword(s):  
Educational Technology ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Social Activity ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Research Perspectives ◽  
Open Datasets

In the landscape of Open Science, Open Data (OD) plays a crucial role as data are one of the most basic components of research, despite their diverse formats across scientific disciplines. Opening up data is a recent concern for policy makers and researchers, as the basis for good Open Science practices. The common factor underlying these new practices—the relevance of promoting Open Data circulation and reuse—is mostly a social form of knowledge sharing and construction. However, while data sharing is being strongly promoted by policy making and is becoming a frequent practice in some disciplinary fields, Open Data sharing is much less developed in Social Sciences and in educational research. In this study, practices of OD publication and sharing in the field of Educational Technology are explored. The aim is to investigate Open Data sharing in a selection of Open Data repositories, as well as in the academic social network site ResearchGate. The 23 Open Datasets selected across five OD platforms were analysed in terms of (a) the metrics offered by the platforms and the affordances for social activity; (b) the type of OD published; (c) the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) data principles compliance; and (d) the extent of presence and related social activity on ResearchGate. The results show a very low social activity in the platforms and very few correspondences in ResearchGate that highlight a limited social life surrounding Open Datasets. Future research perspectives as well as limitations of the study are interpreted in the discussion.

scholarly journals Publishing descriptions of non-public clinical datasets: guidance for researchers, repositories, editors and funding organisations

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
Varsha Khodiyar ◽  
Andrew L Hufton ◽  
Susanna-Assunta Sansone
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Data Access ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Patient Privacy ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Data Repositories

AbstractSharing of experimental clinical research data usually happens between individuals or research groups rather than via public repositories, in part due to the need to protect research participant privacy. This approach to data sharing makes it difficult to connect journal articles with their underlying datasets and is often insufficient for ensuring access to data in the long term. Voluntary data sharing services such as the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) and Clinical Study Data Request (CSDR) projects have increased accessibility to clinical datasets for secondary uses while protecting patient privacy and the legitimacy of secondary analyses but these resources are generally disconnected from journal articles – where researchers typically search for reliable information to inform future research. New scholarly journal and article types dedicated to increasing accessibility of research data have emerged in recent years and, in general, journals are developing stronger links with data repositories. There is a need for increased collaboration between journals, data repositories, researchers, funders, and voluntary data sharing services to increase the visibility and reliability of clinical research. We propose changes to the format and peer-review process for journal articles to more robustly link them to data that are only available on request. We also propose additional features for data repositories to better accommodate non-public clinical datasets, including Data Use Agreements (DUAs).

scholarly journals Incentivising research data sharing: a scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 355
Author(s):  
Helen Buckley Woods ◽  
Stephen Pinfield
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Cultural Change ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Data Practices

Background: Numerous mechanisms exist to incentivise researchers to share their data. This scoping review aims to identify and summarise evidence of the efficacy of different interventions to promote open data practices and provide an overview of current research. Methods: This scoping review is based on data identified from Web of Science and LISTA, limited from 2016 to 2021. A total of 1128 papers were screened, with 38 items being included. Items were selected if they focused on designing or evaluating an intervention or presenting an initiative to incentivise sharing. Items comprised a mixture of research papers, opinion pieces and descriptive articles. Results: Seven major themes in the literature were identified: publisher/journal data sharing policies, metrics, software solutions, research data sharing agreements in general, open science ‘badges’, funder mandates, and initiatives. Conclusions: A number of key messages for data sharing include: the need to build on existing cultures and practices, meeting people where they are and tailoring interventions to support them; the importance of publicising and explaining the policy/service widely; the need to have disciplinary data champions to model good practice and drive cultural change; the requirement to resource interventions properly; and the imperative to provide robust technical infrastructure and protocols, such as labelling of data sets, use of DOIs, data standards and use of data repositories.

scholarly journals CoreTrustSeal

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 162-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Dillo ◽  
Lisa De Leeuw
Keyword(s):  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Digital Repositories ◽  
Long Term Storage ◽  
Fair Principles ◽  
Core Characteristics

Open data and data management policies that call for the long-term storage and accessibility of data are becoming more and more commonplace in the research community. With it the need for trustworthy data repositories to store and disseminate data is growing. CoreTrustSeal, a community based and non-profit organisation, offers data repositories a core level certification based on the DSA-WDS Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements catalogue and procedures. This universal catalogue of requirements reflects the core characteristics of trustworthy data repositories. Core certification involves an uncomplicated process whereby data repositories supply evidence that they are sustainable and trustworthy. A repository first conducts an internal self-assessment, which is then reviewed by community peers. Once the self-assessment is found adequate the CoreTrustSeal board certifies the repository with a CoreTrustSeal. The Seal is valid for a period of three years. Being a certified repository has several external and internal benefits. It for instance improves the quality and transparency of internal processes, increases awareness of and compliance with established standards, builds stakeholder confidence, enhances the reputation of the repository, and demonstrates that the repository is following good practices. It is also offering a benchmark for comparison and helps to determine the strengths and weaknesses of a repository. In the future we foresee a larger uptake through different domains, not in the least because within the European Open Science Cloud, the FAIR principles and therefore also the certification of trustworthy digital repositories holding data is becoming increasingly important. Next to that the CoreTrustSeal requirements will most probably become a European Technical standard which can be used in procurement (under review by the European Commission).

scholarly journals Abordagens de reúso e a questão da reusabilidade dos dados científicos | Approaches for data reuse and the issue of scientific data reusability

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Curty
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Data Reuse ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Documentation Quality ◽  
Data Documentation

RESUMO As diretivas governamentais e institucionais em torno do compartilhamento de dados de pesquisas financiadas com dinheiro público têm impulsionado a rápida expansão de repositórios digitais de dados afim de disponibilizar esses ativos científicos para reutilização, com propósitos nem sempre antecipados, pelos pesquisadores que os produziram/coletaram. De modo contraditório, embora o argumento em torno do compartilhamento de dados seja fortemente sustentado no potencial de reúso e em suas consequentes contribuições para o avanço científico, esse tema permanece acessório às discussões em torno da ciência de dados e da ciência aberta. O presente artigo de revisão narrativa tem por objetivo lançar um olhar mais atento ao reúso de dados e explorar mais diretamente esse conceito, ao passo que propõe uma classificação inicial de cinco abordagens distintas para o reúso de dados de pesquisa (reaproveitamento, agregação, integração, metanálise e reanálise), com base em situações hipotéticas acompanhadas de casos de reúso de dados publicados na literatura científica. Também explora questões determinantes para a condição de reúso, relacionando a reusabilidade à qualidade da documentação que acompanha os dados. Oferece discussão sobre os desafios da documentação de dados, bem como algumas iniciativas e recomendações para que essas dificuldades sejam contornadas. Espera-se que os argumentos apresentados contribuam não somente para o avanço conceitual em torno do reúso e da reusabilidade de dados, mas também reverberem em ações relacionadas à documentação dos dados de modo a incrementar o potencial de reúso desses ativos científicos.Palavras-chave: Reúso de Dados; Reprodutibilidade Científica; Reusabilidade; Ciência Aberta; Dados de Pesquisa. ABSTRACT The availability of scientific assets through data repositories has been greatly increased as a result of government and institutional data sharing policies and mandates for publicly funded research, allowing data to be reused for purposes not always anticipated by primary researchers. Despite the fact that the argument favoring data sharing is strongly grounded in the possibilities of data reuse and its contributions to scientific advancement, this subject remains unobserved in discussions about data science and open science. This paper follows a narrative review method to take a closer look at data reuse in order to better conceptualize this term, while proposing an early classification of five distinct data reuse approaches (repurposing, aggregation, integration, meta-analysis and reanalysis) based on hypothetical cases and literature examples. It also explores the determinants of what constitutes reusable data, and the relationship between data reusability and documentation quality. It presents some challenges associated with data documentation and points out some initiatives and recommendations to overcome such problems. It expects to contribute not only for the conceptual advancement around the reusability and effective reuse of the data, but also to result in initiatives related to data documentation in order to increase the reuse potential of these scientific assets.Keywords:Data Reuse; Scientific Reproducibility; Reusability; Open Science; Research Data.  

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 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 The Spectrum of Data sharing Policies in Neuroimaging Data Repositories

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita Jwa ◽  
Russell Poldrack
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Data Privacy ◽  
Public Investment ◽  
Science Inquiry ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Machine Learning Techniques ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Learning Techniques ◽  
Neuroimaging Data ◽  
Regulatory Analysis

Sharing data is a scientific imperative that accelerates scientific discoveries, reinforces open science inquiry, and allows for efficient use of public investment and research resources. Considering these benefits, data sharing has been widely promoted in diverse fields and neuroscience has been no exception to this movement. For all its promise, however, the sharing of human neuroimaging data raises critical ethical and legal issues, such as data privacy. Recently, the heightened risks to data privacy posed by the exponential development in artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques has made data sharing more challenging; the regulatory landscape around data sharing has also been evolving rapidly. Here we present an in-depth ethical and regulatory analysis that will examine how neuroimaging data are currently shared against the backdrop of the relevant regulations and policies and how advanced software tools and algorithms might undermine subjects’ privacy in neuroimaging data sharing. This analysis will inform researchers on responsible practice of neuroimaging data sharing and shed light on a regulatory framework to provide adequate protection of neuroimaging data while maximizing the benefits of data sharing.

scholarly journals Dynamics of Cumulative Advantage and Threats to Equity in Open Science - A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Ross-Hellauer ◽  
Stefan Reichmann ◽  
Nicki Lisa Cole ◽  
Angela Fessl ◽  
Thomas Klebel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Cumulative Advantage ◽  
The Public ◽  
Technological Readiness ◽  
Data Practices ◽  
Qualitative Methodologies ◽  
Research And Policy

Open Science holds the promise to make scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible, and re-usable for large audiences. However, making processes open will not per se drive wide re-use or participation unless also accompanied by the capacity (in terms of knowledge, skills, financial resources, technological readiness and motivation) to do so. These capacities vary considerably across regions, institutions and demographics. Those advantaged by such factors will remain potentially privileged, putting Open Science’s agenda of inclusivity at risk of propagating conditions of “cumulative advantage”. With this paper, we systematically scope existing research addressing the question: “What evidence and discourse exists in the literature about the ways in which dynamics and structures of inequality could persist or be exacerbated in the transition to Open Science, across disciplines, regions and demographics?” Aiming to synthesise findings, identify gaps in the literature, and inform future research and policy, our results identify threats to equity associated with all aspects of Open Science, including Open Access, Open/FAIR Data, Open Methods, Open Evaluation, Citizen Science, as well as its interfaces with society, industry and policy. Key threats include: stratifications of publishing due to the exclusionary nature of the author-pays model of Open Access; potential widening of the digital divide due to the infrastructure-dependent, highly situated nature of open data practices; risks of diminishing qualitative methodologies as “reproducibility” becomes synonymous with quality; new risks of bias and exclusion in means of transparent evaluation; and crucial asymmetries in the Open Science relationships with industry and the public, which privileges the former and fails to fully include the latter.

scholarly journals Toward collaborative open data science in metabolomics using Jupyter Notebooks and cloud computing

Metabolomics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Mendez ◽  
Leighton Pritchard ◽  
Stacey N. Reinke ◽  
David I. Broadhurst
Keyword(s):  
Cloud Computing ◽  
Web Application ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Data Repository ◽  
Data Repositories ◽  
Fully Integrated ◽  
Computing Platform ◽  
Novices And Experts

Abstract Background A lack of transparency and reporting standards in the scientific community has led to increasing and widespread concerns relating to reproduction and integrity of results. As an omics science, which generates vast amounts of data and relies heavily on data science for deriving biological meaning, metabolomics is highly vulnerable to irreproducibility. The metabolomics community has made substantial efforts to align with FAIR data standards by promoting open data formats, data repositories, online spectral libraries, and metabolite databases. Open data analysis platforms also exist; however, they tend to be inflexible and rely on the user to adequately report their methods and results. To enable FAIR data science in metabolomics, methods and results need to be transparently disseminated in a manner that is rapid, reusable, and fully integrated with the published work. To ensure broad use within the community such a framework also needs to be inclusive and intuitive for both computational novices and experts alike. Aim of Review To encourage metabolomics researchers from all backgrounds to take control of their own data science, mould it to their personal requirements, and enthusiastically share resources through open science. Key Scientific Concepts of Review This tutorial introduces the concept of interactive web-based computational laboratory notebooks. The reader is guided through a set of experiential tutorials specifically targeted at metabolomics researchers, based around the Jupyter Notebook web application, GitHub data repository, and Binder cloud computing platform.

scholarly journals Attitudes Toward Open Science and Public Data Sharing

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 252-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea E. Abele-Brehm ◽  
Mario Gollwitzer ◽  
Ulf Steinberg ◽  
Felix D. Schönbrodt
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Positive Attitudes ◽  
Public Data ◽  
Materials Used

Abstract. Central values of science are, among others, transparency, verifiability, replicability, and openness. The currently very prominent Open Science (OS) movement supports these values. Among its most important principles are open methodology (comprehensive and useful documentation of methods and materials used), open access to published research output, and open data (making collected data available for re-analyses). We here present a survey conducted among members of the German Psychological Society ( N = 337), in which we applied a mixed-methods approach (quantitative and qualitative data) to assess attitudes toward OS in general and toward data sharing more specifically. Attitudes toward OS were distinguished into positive expectations (“hopes”) and negative expectations (“fears”). These were un-correlated. There were generally more hopes associated with OS and data sharing than fears. Both hopes and fears were highest among early career researchers and lowest among professors. The analysis of the open answers revealed that generally positive attitudes toward data sharing (especially sharing of data related to a published article) are somewhat diminished by cost/benefit considerations. The results are discussed with respect to individual researchers’ behavior and with respect to structural changes in the research system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document