Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: Understanding the motivation to publish research data

Sayogo, Djoko Sigit; Pardo, Theresa A.

doi:10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.011

Cited by 110 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While academics have always engaged in practices of research data sharing across research teams, historically this was accomplished through personal networks and fostered through collegiality and trust (Sayogo & Pardo, 2013). While these informal methods of data sharing still exist, in recent years we can observe increased -use practices (Tenopir et al, 2015).…”

Section: Data Friction In the Circulation Of Publicly Funded Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These findings suggest that (Star, 1999) and underdeveloped, rather than functioning seamlessly behind the scenes, and thus generates Data infrastructure developers face a multitude of challenges in enabling data to move between data producers and re-users. These include the complexity of scientific data (Koslow, 2002;Sayogo & Pardo, 2013), the unpredictability and dynamism of technological change (Bietz et al, 2016), the lack of standardised methods, data management and data sharing practices across disciplines (Reichman et al, 2011;Sayogo & Pardo, 2013;Borgman, 2012), the challenges of appropriately anonymising and sharing human subject data (King, 2011), and the barriers faced in financing sustainable open research data repositories (Kitchin et al, 2015). Examining some of these challenges in more depth, Leonelli (2013a) observes the immense challenges faced by database developers aiming to create a data sharing infrastructure for plant scientists studying the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana while respecting the diverse epistemic cultures within the discipline.…”

Section: Data Sharing Infrastructure and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Relatedly, costs are also seen as prohibitive (Sayogo & Pardo, 2013). The political economy of research funding and the financial management of research institutions data friction.…”

Section: Data Sharing Infrastructure and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Academic culture rewards researchers for their publications, not for their datasets (Sayogo & Pardo, 2013), and tends to incentivise self-interested behaviour. While there have been calls to adapt the citations and rewards system (Tenopir et al, 2015), there continue to be few incentives for researchers to publish data (Kaslow, 2002;Tenopir et al, 2015).…”

Section: Socio-cultural Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The politics of data friction

Bates

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structured Abstract PurposeThe aim of the paper is to further develop Paul Edwards' concept of "data friction" by examining the socio-material forces that are shaping data movements in the cases of research data and online communications data. The paper aims to articulate a politics of data friction, identifying the interrelated infrastructural, socio-cultural and regulatory dynamics of data friction, and how these are contributing to the constitution of social relations. Design/methodology/approachThe article develops a hermeneutic review of the literature on socio-material factors influencing the movement of digital data between social actors in the cases of research data sharing and online communications data. Parallels between the two cases are identified and used to further develop understanding of the politics of "data friction" beyond the concept's current usage within the Science Studies literature. FindingsA number of overarching parallels are identified relating to (1) the ways in which new data flows and the frictions that shape them bring social actors into new forms of relation with one another, (2) the platformisation of infrastructures for data circulation, and (3) state action to influence the dynamics of d M resulting from the collective decisions of human actors who experience significantly different levels of empowerment with regard to shaping the overall outcome. Research implicationsThe paper further develops Paul Edwards' concept of "data friction" beyond its current application in Science Studies. Analysis of the broader dynamics of data friction across different cases identifies a number of parallels that require further empirical examination and theorisation. Practical implicationsThe observation that sites of data friction are deeply political has significant implications for all engaged in the practice and management of digital data production, circulation and use. Social implicationsI some of the complex socio-material dynamics shaping emergent data movements across a variety of domains, and inform deliberation at all levels -from everyday practice to international regulationabout how such frictions can be collectively shaped towards the creation of more equitable and just societies. Originality/valueThe paper makes an original contribution to the literature on friction in the dynamics of digital data movement, arguing that in many cases data friction may be something to enable and foster, rather than overcome. It also brings together literature from diverse disciplinary fields to examine these frictional dynamics within two cases that have not previously been examined in relation to one another.

show abstract

Section: Data Friction In the Circulation Of Publicly Funded Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Sharing Infrastructure and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Relatedly, costs are also seen as prohibitive (Sayogo & Pardo, 2013). The political economy of research funding and the financial management of research institutions data friction.…”

Section: Data Sharing Infrastructure and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Socio-cultural Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The politics of data friction

Bates

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advantages of data sharing have been well-documented -from ensuring the accountability of researchers, to the benefits of pooling datasets to glean new insights (Mello 2013;Vickers 2011), and the benefits of sharing large and expensive datasets (such as genomic data) (Sayogo & Pardo 2013). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the copyright and licensing knowledge gap

Fahey¹,

Freestone²,

Russell³

et al. 2016

dsc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(BA Melb, GDIM RMIT, MInfoStud CSturt) is currently Electronic Resources Coordinator at Deakin University Library. She has previously worked in the roles of Library Professional Cadet and Electronic Resources Librarian at Deakin University and also in roles at Darebin Libraries. Alice's professional interests include electronic resource acquisitions, collection assessment and evaluation, and trends in licensing and scholarly communication.Chrissy Freestone (BA (Otago), Grad Dip Library and Info Studies (UTAS)) is currently a Liaison Librarian with the Faculty of Health at Deakin University Library. She has worked for many years in a variety of roles in academic libraries in New Zealand, Tasmania and Victoria. As a liaison librarian she has worked in both business and health disciplines. Chrissy's professional interests include innovations in the delivery of digital literacy, and trends and developments in health librarianship. ORCID iD http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7260-9825 Deakin University Library staff are active participants in our professional community where we build and share expertise; interpret, analyse and communicate trends and developments that may have significant impacts for the Library and Deakin University, and that can assist in building a bold and exciting future for Deakin.We welcome your feedback on any of the papers in discourse and your discussion on the topics that they raise. Series Bridging the Copyright and Licensing Knowledge GapAlice Fahey, Chrissy Freestone, Fiona Russell and Caitlin Savage AbstractObjectives: The purpose of this project was to examine the copyright and licensing knowledge gap of academic staff to identify their current understanding of, and attitudes towards, copyright, licensing and the open access movement in relation to the content they use, create, and share in their teaching and research practice. The motivation behind this study was to gather information to assist the Library in creating and providing effective information resources and training for academic staff. Methods: An anonymous online survey was distributed to Faculty of Health academic staff at Deakin University. Seventy individuals in the Faculty of Health completed the survey. Results:The results suggested that most of the academics have used content created by others in their teaching materials, but they are not confident about complying with copyright or licensing conditions whilst doing so. Most had not posted any of their own content online, but would generally be willing for it to be used by others, with attribution. Around half had never posted their published articles in an institutional or discipline repository, but again, would be willing for them to be used for educational purposes. Most academics have never shared their research data online, and some were very unwilling to do so -despite current pushes to broaden access to research data sets. Finally, most had never applied a Creative Commons licence to a piece of work, and over half were unaware of what rights they had retained under p...

show abstract

Assessing the Extent and Impact of Online Data Sharing in Eddy Covariance Flux Research

Dai

Xiong

et al. 2018

JGR Biogeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research data sharing is appealing for its potential benefits on sharers' scientific impact and is also advocated by various policies. How do scientific benefits and policies correlate with practical ecological data sharing? In this study, we investigated data‐sharing practices in eddy covariance flux research as a typical case. First, we collected researchers' data‐sharing information from major observation networks. Then, we downloaded bibliometric data from the Web of Science and evaluated scientific impact using LeaderRank, a synthetic algorithm that takes both citation and cooperation impacts into consideration. Our results demonstrated the following: (1) specific to eddy covariance flux research, 8% of researchers published information in public data portals, whereas 64% of researchers provided their available data online in a downloadable form; (2) regional differences in data sharing, publications, and observation networks existed; and (3) the data sharers in impact‐ranked ecologists followed a long‐tail distribution, which suggested that, although sharing data is not necessary for researchers to be influential, data sharers are more likely to be high‐impact researchers. Differentiated policies should be proposed to encourage ecologists in the long tail of data sharers, and from regions with little tradition of data sharing, to embrace a more open model of science.

show abstract

Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: Understanding the motivation to publish research data

Cited by 110 publications

References 36 publications

The politics of data friction

The politics of data friction

Bridging the copyright and licensing knowledge gap

Assessing the Extent and Impact of Online Data Sharing in Eddy Covariance Flux Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About