Digital Repository Services for Managing Research Data: What Do Oxford Researchers Need?

Martinez-Uribe, Luis

doi:10.29173/iq186

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the positive attitude towards sharing research data, there are considerable reservations. An early study by Martinez-Uribe (2007) in which 37 researchers from Oxford were interviewed concluded that few of them had deposited any data in domain-specific data archives; rather, researchers preferred to use their departmental website. The top three requirements expressed by them were: having a secure and user-friendly solution, a sustainable infrastructure, and advice on practical issues related to managing data across its life cycle.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research data management and sharing among researchers in Arab universities: An exploratory study

Elsayed

Saleh

2018

IFLA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates researchers’ current practices for managing and sharing research data. An online survey was conducted among researchers from three Arab universities in Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. In total, 337 participants filled out the questionnaire. The study shows that 97% of researchers were responsible for their research data, and 64.4% of researchers shared their data. Contributing to scientific progress and increasing research citations and visibility were the key factors that motivated researchers to share data. However, confidentiality and data misuse were the main concerns among those who were reluctant to share. Finally, some recommendations regarding the improvement of data management and sharing practices are presented.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research data management and sharing among researchers in Arab universities: An exploratory study

Elsayed

Saleh

2018

IFLA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In one common type, which we termed “targeted,” the entire investigation is focused in one or two closely related areas, such as resources or specific actions like curation (e.g., Akmon 2014, Atkins 2003, Ayris et al 2010, Beagrie and Houghton 2013a and 2013b, Borgman et al 2014, Cirrinnà et al 2013). Another common type comprises “wider” studies, which investigate several different gap areas at once, often in the context of a single institution, a nation’s scientific enterprises, or a comparative international framework (e.g., Alexogiannopoulos et al 2010, Gibbs 2009, Hoeflich Mohr et al 2015, Jerrome and Breeze 2009, Kuipers and van der Hoeven 2009, Martinez-Uribe 2009, Mitcham et al 2015, Open Exeter Project Team 2012, Parsons et al 2013, Perry 2008, Peters and Dryden 2011, Thornhill and Palmer 2014, UNC-CH 2012, Waller and Sharpe 2006). Of the 142 we reviewed, 115 studies were targeted, and 28 were wider.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do We Know about the Stewardship Gap

York

Gutmann

Berman

2018

Data Science Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the 21st century, digital data drive innovation and decision-making in nearly every field. However, little is known about the total size, characteristics, and sustainability of these data. In the scholarly sphere, it is widely suspected that there is a gap between the amount of valuable digital data that is produced and the amount that is effectively stewarded and made accessible. The Stewardship Gap Project (http://bit.ly/stewardshipgap) investigates characteristics of, and measures, the stewardship gap for sponsored scholarly activity in the United States. This paper presents a preliminary definition of the stewardship gap based on a review of relevant literature and investigates areas of the stewardship gap for which metrics have been developed and measurements made, and where work to measure the stewardship gap is yet to be done. The main findings presented are 1) there is not one stewardship gap but rather multiple “gaps” that contribute to whether data is responsibly stewarded; 2) there are relationships between the gaps that can be used to guide strategies for addressing the various stewardship gaps; and 3) there are imbalances in the types and depths of studies that have been conducted to measure the stewardship gap.

show abstract

“…E--research developments have major implications for library activities in digital and data stewardship, digital and data reference and digital and data literacy. Data here can originate from observation, simulation or experiments; it can take many forms (such as text, numbers, audio, still and moving images), and relate to any discipline, including the arts and humanities (Martinez--Uribe, 2007;Williford and Henry, 2012).…”

Section: Current Trends Implications and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The researcher's view: context is critical

Corrall¹,

Lester²

Better Library and Learning Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital Repository Services for Managing Research Data: What Do Oxford Researchers Need?

Abstract: Digital Repository Services for Managing Research Data: What Do Oxford Researchers Need?

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Research data management and sharing among researchers in Arab universities: An exploratory study

Research data management and sharing among researchers in Arab universities: An exploratory study

What Do We Know about the Stewardship Gap

The researcher's view: context is critical

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About