Archives des mots-clés : scientific practices

Researchers and Their Data : Results of an Austrian Survey

Posté le par

This report provides an overview of the Austria-wide survey for research data, which was carried out within the framework of the project e-Infrastructures Austria at the beginning of 2015. This survey was directed at the arts, humanities and sciences staff of all 21 public universities and three extramural research institutions in Austria.

The participants were asked about the following topics :

  • Data types and formats
  • Data archiving, backup and loss
  • Ethical and legal aspects
  • Accessibility and subsequent use
  • Infrastructure and services

This first inquiry conducted at a national level in this context, facilitates the collection of methods for the practical handling of research data in Austria, and is therefore the basis (1) for an on-going effort to optimize infrastructure, (2) for an adaptation of the services provided, as well as (3) for a reorientation of the identification method for resources in this strategic area, which correspond to the expressed needs of people in the research process.

URL : Researchers and Their Data : Results of an Austrian Survey

Alternative location : https://fedora.phaidra.univie.ac.at/fedora/get/o:409318/bdef:Content/get

Open Scholarship Practices Reshaping South Africa’s Scholarly Publishing Roadmap

Posté le par

South African higher education institutions are the largest producers of research output on the African continent. Given this status, South African researchers have a moral obligation to share their research output with the rest of the continent via a medium that minimizes challenges of access; open scholarship is that medium. The majority of South African higher education libraries provide an open access publishing service. However, in most of these cases this service is via engagement with the green open access route, that is, institutional repositories (IR).

Some of the libraries have piloted and adopted gold open access services such as publishing of “diamond” gold open access journals and supporting article processing charges. The experiment with publishing open monographs is a new venture. This venture must be viewed against the backdrop of the need for open educational resources (OERs). OER is an area that is very much in a fledgling stage and is gaining traction, albeit, at a slow pace.

The growth of IRs, the growth in support for gold open access including the library acting as a publisher, the experimentation with open monographs, and OERs are all shaping South Africa’s scholarly publishing roadmap.

URL : Open Scholarship Practices Reshaping South Africa’s Scholarly Publishing Roadmap

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/publications3040263

Data Sharing Among Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources Scientists: An Analysis of Selected Publications

Statut

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the differing data management practices among academic disciplines is an important way to inform existing and emerging library research support and services. This paper reports findings from a study of data sharing practices among ecology, evolution, and natural resources scientists at the University of Minnesota. It examines data sharing rates, methods, and disciplinary differences and discusses the characteristics of researchers, data, methods, and aspects of data sharing across this group of disciplines.

METHODS

Data sharing practices are investigated by reviewing the two most recently published research articles (n=155) for each faculty member (n=78) in three departments at a single large research university. All mentions of data sharing in each publication were pursued in order to locate, analyze, and characterize shared data.

RESULTS

Seventy-two of 155 (46%) articles indicated that related research data was publicly shared by some method. The most prevalent method for data sharing was via journal websites, with 91% of data sharing articles using this method. Ecology, evolution, and behavior scientists shared data at the highest rate (70% of their articles), contrasting with fisheries, wildlife, and conservation biologists (18%), and forest resources (16%).

DISCUSSION

Differences between data sharing practices may be attributable to a range of influences: funder, journal, and institutional policies; disciplinary norms; and perceived or real rewards or incentives, as well as contrasting concerns, cost, or other barriers to sharing data.

CONCLUSION

Study results suggest differential approaches to data services outreach based on discipline and research type and support the need for education and influence on both scientist and journal practices.

URL : Data Sharing Among Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources Scientists: An Analysis of Selected Publications

DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1244

Approaches to Data Sharing: An Analysis of NSF Data Management Plans from a Large Research University

Statut

INTRODUCTION

Sharing digital research data is increasingly common, propelled by funding requirements, journal publishers, local campus policies, or community-driven expectations of more collaborative and interdisciplinary research environments. However, it is not well understood how researchers are addressing these expectations and whether they are transitioning from individualized practices to more thoughtful and potentially public approaches to data sharing that will enable reuse of their data.

METHODS

The University of Minnesota Libraries conducted a local opt-in study of data management plans (DMPs) included in funded National Science Foundation (NSF) grant proposals from January 2011 through June 2014. In order to understand the current data management and sharing practices of campus researchers, we solicited, coded, and analyzed 182 DMPs, accounting for 41% of the total number of plans available.

RESULTS

DMPs from seven colleges and academic units were included. The College of Science of Engineering accounted for 70% of the plans in our review. While 96% of DMPs mentioned data sharing, we found a variety of approaches for how PIs shared their data, where data was shared, the intended audiences for sharing, and practices for ensuring long-term reuse.

CONCLUSION

DMPs are useful tools to investigate researchers’ current plans and philosophies for how research outputs might be shared. Plans and strategies for data sharing are inconsistent across this sample, and researchers need to better understand what kind of sharing constitutes public access. More intervention is needed to ensure that researchers implement the sharing provisions in their plans to the fullest extent possible. These findings will help academic libraries develop practical, targeted data services for researchers that aim to increase the impact of institutional research.

URL : Approaches to Data Sharing: An Analysis of NSF Data Management Plans from a Large Research University

DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1231

Data Management Practices Across an Institution: Survey and Report

Statut

INTRODUCTION

Data management is becoming increasingly important to researchers in all fields. The E-Science Working Group designed a survey to investigate how researchers at Northwestern University currently manage data and to help determine their future needs regarding data management.

METHODS

A 21-question survey was distributed to approximately 12,940 faculty, graduate students, postdoctoral candidates, and selected research-affiliated staff at Northwestern’s Evanston and Chicago Campuses. Survey questions solicited information regarding types and size of data, current and future needs for data storage, data retention and data sharing, what researchers are doing (or not doing) regarding data management planning, and types of training or assistance needed. There were 831 responses and 788 respondents completed the survey, for a response rate of approximately 6.4%.

RESULTS

Survey results indicate investigators need both short and long term storage and preservation solutions. However, 31% of respondents did not know how much storage they will require. This means that establishing a correctly sized research storage service will be difficult. Additionally, research data is stored on local hard drives, departmental servers or equipment hard drives. These types of storage solutions limit data sharing and long term preservation.

Data sharing tends to occur within a research group or with collaborators prior to publication, expanding to more public availability after publication. Survey responses also indicate a need to provide increased consulting and support services, most notably for data management planning, awareness of regulatory requirements, and use of research software.

URL : Data Management Practices Across an Institution: Survey and Report

DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1225

Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide

Statut

The incorporation of data sharing into the research lifecycle is an important part of modern scholarly debate. In this study, the DataONE Usability and Assessment working group addresses two primary goals: To examine the current state of data sharing and reuse perceptions and practices among research scientists as they compare to the 2009/2010 baseline study, and to examine differences in practices and perceptions across age groups, geographic regions, and subject disciplines.

We distributed surveys to a multinational sample of scientific researchers at two different time periods (October 2009 to July 2010 and October 2013 to March 2014) to observe current states of data sharing and to see what, if any, changes have occurred in the past 3–4 years. We also looked at differences across age, geographic, and discipline-based groups as they currently exist in the 2013/2014 survey.

Results point to increased acceptance of and willingness to engage in data sharing, as well as an increase in actual data sharing behaviors. However, there is also increased perceived risk associated with data sharing, and specific barriers to data sharing persist. There are also differences across age groups, with younger respondents feeling more favorably toward data sharing and reuse, yet making less of their data available than older respondents. Geographic differences exist as well, which can in part be understood in terms of collectivist and individualist cultural differences.

An examination of subject disciplines shows that the constraints and enablers of data sharing and reuse manifest differently across disciplines. Implications of these findings include the continued need to build infrastructure that promotes data sharing while recognizing the needs of different research communities.

Moving into the future, organizations such as DataONE will continue to assess, monitor, educate, and provide the infrastructure necessary to support such complex grand science challenges.

URL : Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide

DOI : 10.1371/journal.pone.0134826

The role of trust and authority in the citation behaviour of researchers

Statut

Introduction

This paper reports on an interview-based citation behaviour study, part of a wider study of trust in information resources, investigating why researchers chose to cite particular references in one of their publications. Their motivations are explored, with an emphasis on whether they regarded the reference as an authoritative and trustworthy source, and, if so, to what extent and why.

Method

Semi-structured critical incident interviews were carried out with eighty-seven researchers from the UK and the USA.

Analysis

The answers were analysed using qualitative techniques and then grouped under descriptive headings of the types of reasons for citation provided. These were then used to create a table of these types of reason and the frequency of their use.

Results

The motivations for citing were found to be complex and multi-faceted but, in nearly all cases, researchers do regard the authority and trustworthiness of the cited source as an important factor in choosing to cite it. This suggests that citation is at least partly an acknowledgement of the intellectual influence of the content of the cited source. It was also found, however, that researchers have strong social networks of trust and collaboration. They make considerable use of these in receiving and gathering information for research and thus context is also important in their eventual citation decisions.

Conclusions

Citing behaviour does include an acknowledgement of useful intellectual content, but this process cannot be separated from the researcher’s position in networks of trusted social and research influence. The digital transition has provided tools to help maintain and develop these social networks and it has also made it easier for researchers to investigate the credentials of the sources of documents. This suggests that the current distinction in the literature between normative and constructionist theories of citation behaviour may not capture the nuanced and complex relationship between these two factors.

URL : http://www.informationr.net/ir/20-3/paper677.html