Archives des mots-clés : research data

Bringing All the Stakeholders to the Table: A Collaborative Approach to Data Sharing

Posté le par

Authors : Megan N. O’Donnell, Curtis Brundy

Objective

This paper examines a unique data set disclosure process at a medium sized, land grant, research university and the campus collaboration that led to its creation.

Methods

The authors utilized a single case study methodology, reviewing relevant documents and workflows. As first-hand participants in the collaboration and disclosure process development, their own accounts and experiences also were utilized.

Results

A collaborative approach to enhancing research data sharing is essential, considering the wide array of stakeholders involved across the life cycle of research data. A transparent, inclusive data set disclosure process is a viable route to ensuring research data can be appropriately shared.

Conclusions

Successful sharing of research data impacts a range of university units and individuals. The establishment of productive working relationships and trust between these stakeholders is critical to expanding the sharing of research data and to establishing shared workflows.

URL : Bringing All the Stakeholders to the Table: A Collaborative Approach to Data Sharing

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2022.1224

La Science Ouverte à l’Université de Lorraine : bilan des actions entreprises et enjeux pour l’avenir

Posté le par

Auteurs.trices/Authors : Laetitia Bracco, Julien Brancher, Nicolas Fressengeas, Lylette Lacôte-Gabrysiak, Andreas Gutsfeld, Rudy Hahusseau, Thomas Jouneau, Celia Lentretien, Jean-François Lutz, Frédéric Villiéras

Le présent document se propose de retracer succinctement les actions entreprises par l’Université de Lorraine dans le cadre de sa politique Science Ouverte, elle-même dans les pas du premier Plan National pour la Science Ouverte de 2018 (PNSO1), puis d’esquisser les grands enjeux en la matière pour l’établissement, s’inspirant pour ce faire du deuxième Plan National pour le Science Ouverte, publié en 2021 (PNSO2), des initiatives de la Commission Européenne et de la récente recommandation de l’Unesco.

La première partie présentera donc le bilan des réalisations, en le structurant via les grands axes du PNSO1 ; tout comme la deuxième partie, qui s’efforcera d’anticiper les grands enjeux pour les années à venir, aidée en cela par le PNSO2 dont elle adopte la structuration.

URL : https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-03554958

Barriers to Full Participation in the Open Science Life Cycle among Early Career Researchers

Posté le par

Authors : Natasha J. Gownaris, Koen Vermeir, Martin-Immanuel Bittner, Lasith Gunawardena, Sandeep Kaur-Ghumaan, Robert Lepenies, Godswill Ntsomboh Ntsefong, Ibrahim Sidi Zakari

Open science (OS) is currently dominated by a small subset of practices that occur late in the scientific process. Early career researchers (ECRs) will play a key role in transitioning the scientific community to more widespread use of OS from pre-registration to publication, but they also face unique challenges in adopting these practices. Here, we discuss these challenges across the OS life cycle.

Our essay relies on the published literature, an informal survey of 32 ECRs from 14 countries, and discussions among members of the Global Working Group on Open Science (Global Young Academy and National Young Academies).

We break the OS life cycle into four stages—study design and tracking (pre-registration, open processes), data collection (citizen science, open hardware, open software, open data), publication (open access publishing, open peer review, open data), and outreach (open educational resources, citizen science)—and map potential barriers at each stage.

The most frequently discussed barriers across the OS life cycle were a lack of awareness and training, prohibitively high time commitments, and restrictions and/or a lack of incentives by supervisors.

We found that OS practices are highly fragmented and that awareness is particularly low for OS practices that occur during the study design and tracking stage, possibly creating ‘path-dependencies’ that reduce the likelihood of OS practices at later stages.

We note that, because ECRs face unique barriers to adopting OS, there is a need for specifically targeted policies such as mandatory training at the graduate level and promotion incentives.

URL : Barriers to Full Participation in the Open Science Life Cycle among Early Career Researchers

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2022-002

The Data Life Aquatic: Oceanographers’ Experience with Interoperability and Re-usability: Oceanographers’ Experience with Interoperability and Re-usability

Posté le par

Authors : Bradley Wade Bishop, Carolyn F Hank, Joel T Webster

This paper assesses data consumers’ perspectives on the interoperable and re-usable aspects of the FAIR Data Principles. Taking a domain-specific informatics approach, ten oceanographers were asked to think of a recent search for data and describe their process of discovery, evaluation, and use.

The interview schedule, derived from the FAIR Data Principles, included questions about the interoperability and re-usability of data. Through this critical incident technique, findings on data interoperability and re-usability give data curators valuable insights into how real-world users access, evaluate, and use data.

Results from this study show that oceanographers utilize tools that make re-use simple, with interoperability seamless within the systems used. The processes employed by oceanographers present a good baseline for other domains adopting the FAIR Data Principles.

URL : The Data Life Aquatic: Oceanographers’ Experience with Interoperability and Re-usability: Oceanographers’ Experience with Interoperability and Re-usability

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v16i1.635

Les revues SIC et les données de recherche : Une étude empirique

Posté le par

Auteurs/Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Eric Kergosien

Dans le cadre de la politique de la science ouverte, les revues scientifiques jouent un rôle central pour l’ouverture et le partage des données de recherche. Notre étude porte sur 95 revues en sciences de l’information et de la communication (liste de la section Conseil national des universités [CNU] 71).

Nous avons analysé leur politique éditoriale en matière d’intégrité et de transparence en appliquant les 10 critères du TOP Factor du Center for Open Science aux recommandations et instructions aux auteurs. Plus de la moitié des revues n’affichent aucune politique dans ce domaine.

Les autres encouragent les auteurs à partager leurs données et/ou d’autres matériels, avec parfois des consignes pour la citation des données. Très peu de revues vont plus loin et exigent une telle transparence.

Les résultats sont discutés par rapport aux divergences d’interprétation et d’évaluation, par rapport à la représentativité de l’échantillon et par rapport aux choix des rédactions et éditeurs. Plusieurs pistes pour aller plus loin sont indiquées.

URL : Les revues SIC et les données de recherche : Une étude empirique

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.35562/balisages.641

Do I Have To Be An “Other” To Be Myself? Exploring Gender Diversity In Taxonomy, Data Collection, And Through The Research Data Lifecycle

Posté le par

Authors : Ari Gofman, Sam A. Leif, Hannah Gunderman, Nina Exner

Objective

Existing studies estimate that between 0.3% and 2% of adults in the U.S. (between 900,000 and 2.6 million in 2020) identify as a nonbinary gender or otherwise gender nonconforming. In response to the RDAP 2021 theme of radical change, this article examines the need to change how datasets represent nonbinary persons and how research involving gender data should approach the curation of this data at each stage of the research lifecycle.

Methods

In this article, we examine some of the known challenges of gender inclusion in datasets and summarize some solutions underway. Using a critical lens, we examine the difference between current practice and inclusive practice in gender representation, describing inclusive practices at each stage of the research lifecycle from writing a data management plan to sharing data.

Results

Data structures that limit gender to “male” and “female” or ontological structures that use mapping to collapse gender demographics to binary values exclude nonbinary and gender diverse populations. Some data collection instruments attempt inclusivity by adding the gender category of “other,” but using the “other” gender category labels nonbinary persons as intrinsically alien.

Inclusive change must go farther, to move from alienation to inclusive categories. We describe several techniques for inclusively representing gender in data, from the data management planning stage, to collecting data, cleaning data, and sharing data.

To facilitate better sharing of gender data, repositories must also allow mapping that includes nonbinary genders explicitly and allow for ontological mapping for long-term representation of diverse gender identities.

Conclusions

A good practice during research design is to consider two levels of critique in the data collection plan. First, consider the research question at hand and remove unnecessary gendering from the data.

Secondly, if the research question needs gender, make sure to include nonbinary genders explicitly. Allies must take on this problem without leaving it to those who are most affected by it. Further, more voices calling for inclusionary practices surrounding data rises to a crescendo that cannot be ignored.

URL: Do I Have To Be An “Other” To Be Myself? Exploring Gender Diversity In Taxonomy, Data Collection, And Through The Research Data Lifecycle

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2021.1219