Making Sense: Talking Data Management with Researchers

Abstract

Incremental is one of eight projects in the JISC Managing Research Data programme funded to identify institutional requirements for digital research data management and pilot relevant infrastructure. Our findings concur with those of other Managing Research Data projects, as well as with several previous studies. We found that many researchers: (i) organise their data in an ad hoc fashion, posing difficulties with retrieval and re-use; (ii) store their data on all kinds of media without always considering security and back-up; (iii) are positive about data sharing in principle though reluctant in practice; (iv) believe back-up is equivalent to preservation. The key difference between our approach and that of other Managing Research Data projects is the type of infrastructure we are piloting. While the majority of these projects focus on developing technical solutions, we are focusing on the need for ‘soft’ infrastructure, such as one-to-one tailored support, training, and easy-to-find, concise guidance that breaks down some of the barriers information professionals have unintentionally built with their use of specialist terminology.We are employing a bottom-up approach as we feel that to support the step-by-step development of sound research data management practices, you must first understand researchers’ needs and perspectives. Over the life of the project, Incremental staff will act as mediators, assisting researchers and local support staff to understand the data management requirements within which they are expect to work, and will determine how these can be addressed within research workflows and the existing technical infrastructure.Our primary goal is to build data management capacity within the Universities of Cambridge and Glasgow by raising awareness of basic principles so everyone can manage their data to a certain extent. We will ensure our lessons can be picked up and used by other institutions. Our affiliation with the Digital Curation Centre and Digital Preservation Coalition will assist in this and all outputs will be released under a Creative Commons licence.

Research data management policy and practice in Chinese university libraries

“…It is important to acknowledge that there is a large body of evidence demonstrating that openness is not always simply good and it may be much more to the advantage of scholars in western countries than to researchers in less advantaged contexts (Bezuidenhout, Leonelli, Kelly, & Rappert, 2017). For researchers, who agree in principle but are reluctant in practice to share or open their data (Ward, Freiman, Molloy, Jones, & Snow, 2010), the newly released Measures has no substantial impact on their daily data management activities, and they do not need to make further changes.…”

Research data management in the French National Research Center (CNRS)

“…These results are convergent as they confirm a great need for support and basic assistance; in many respects, RDM is not just (only) a technical problem but a “people problem”, e.g., guidance, training, and support (Ward et al , 2011). “Improving tools are not the only steps necessary to overcome barriers.…”

Research data management in universities of central China

“…According to the investigation, despite many emerging and potential problems, 60 per cent of participants were satisfied with their existing RDM methods and more than 40 per cent of researchers had no clear understanding that data management can play an active role in research. Furthermore, regarding data sharing, although over 80 per cent of participants expressed a positive attitude, most researchers, in fact, are positive in principle but almost universally reluctant in practice (Ward and Freiman, 2011).…”

“…Therefore, libraries need to consider how to effectively communicate with researchers, involve themselves in research activities and establish a complete solution for understanding, accessing and providing data services. Some important findings by Ward and Freiman (2011) provided some guiding principles. They noted from conversations with researchers that most of them do not understand the process of digital curation and that they are not familiar with terms such as preservation or digital repository.…”