SA: Sharing and Access

Citationsort descending Purpose Method Study Type
Akers, K., & Doty J. (2013).  Disciplinary differences in faculty research data management practices and perspectives. International Journal of Digital Curation. 8(2), 5 - 26. Investigated disciplinary differences in research data management needs at Emory University Sent email invitation to participate in online survey to all employees at Emory University with faculty status. 456 out of 5,590 (8%) initiated survey. 330 responded that conduct research that generates some kind of data and filled out one question Measurement, Wider
Alexogiannopoulos, E., McKenney S., & Pickton M. (2010).  Research Data Management Project: a DAF investigation of research data management practices at The University of Northampton. Investigated research data management practices at the University of Northampton, specifically the types of data held by researchers throughout the university, researchers‟ existing data management practices, and the risks associated with these practices. Used the Digital Asset Framework methodology Measurement, Wider
Averkamp, S., Gu X., & Rogers B. (2014).  Data Management at the University of Iowa: A University Libraries Report on Campus Research Data Needs. This data management report was commissioned by the University of Iowa Libraries with the intention of performing a survey of the campus landscape and identifying gaps in data management services The first stage of data collection consisted of a survey conducted during summer 2012 to which 784 responses were received. The second phase of data collection consisted of approximately 40 in-depth interviews with individuals from the campus and were completed during summer 2013. The individuals engaged during the data collection phase spanned a diverse set of campus programs but should not be considered comprehensive. Information Technology Services was invited to participate in the interview process and has also contributed to this report. Measurement, Wider
Beile, P. (2014).  The UCF Research Data Management Survey: A report of faculty practices and needs. Investigated faculty data management needs and practices at the University of Central Florida Conducted an online survey containing 33 questions. There were 534 valid recipients and 97 who partially or fully completed the survey. Measurement, Wider
Fearon, D., Gunia B., Pralle B., Lake S., & Sallans A. (2013).  ARL Spec Kit 334: Research data management services. To assess early endeavors in research data services and benchmark future growth in ARL member libraries. Conducted a survey of ARL member libraries. 73 of 125 responded. Measurement, Wider
Fecher, B., Friesike S., & Hebing M. (2015).  What Drives Academic Data Sharing?. PLoS ONE. 10(2), e0118053. Investigated the creation of a framework that explains the process of data sharing from the researcher’s point of view Performed a systematic review of 98 scholarly papers and empirical survey among 603 secondary data users Measurement, Metrics, Targeted
Federer, L., Lu Y-L., Joubert D., Welsh J., & Brandys B. (2015).  Biomedical Data Sharing and Reuse: Attitudes and Practices of Clinical and Scientific Research Staff. PLoS ONE. 10(6),  Investigated differences in experiences with and perceptions about sharing data, as well as barriers to sharing among clinical and basic science researchers Distributed a survey to Clinical and basic science researchers in the Intramural Research Program at the National Institutes of Health. The survey was publicized through various NIH email lists, including NIH library and NIH special interest groups. Of 190 respondents, 135 who identified as clinical or basic science researchers were included in analysis.
 Asked: Reuse (how relevant was their work and level of expertise); Relevance and expertise regarding depositing data in a repository; uploading data to a repository; sharing practices (metadata, codebook, processing); acknowledgement for sharing; reasons for not sharing Measurement, Targeted
Gibbs, H. (2009).  Southampton Data Survey: Our Experience and Lessons Learned. To pilot the Digital Asset Framework (or Digital Audit Framework) methodology Used a modified version of the Digital Asset Framework; modified mainly due to time considerations; distributed an online questionnaire and follow-up interviews with researchers at the University of Southampton Measurement, Wider
Hedstrom, M., Niu J., & Marz K. (2006).  Producing Archive-Ready Datasets: Compliance, Incentives, and Motivation. IASSIST. Investigated effort researchers are willing to put into preparing data for deposit into an archive and incentives to induce researchers to improve the quality of data and metadata deposited Surveyed 170 researchers funded by the National Institute of Justice, which requires deposit of data in an established archive (National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research-NAJCD) Measurement, Metrics, Targeted
Hedstrom, M., & Niu J. (2008).  Incentives for Data Producers to Create “Archive-Ready” Data: Implications for Archives and Records Management. Society of American Archivists Research Forum. Investigated researcher behavior and attitudes about depositing data from sponsored research Conducted a survey of 55 graduates of the National Institute of Justice Measurement, Targeted
Huang, X., Hawkins B. A., Lei F., Miller G. L., Favret C., Zhang R., et al. (2012).  Willing or unwilling to share primary biodiversity data: results and implications of an international survey. Conservation Letters. 5(5), 399 - 406. Investigated attitudes, experiences, and expectations of researchers sharing and archiving of regarding biodiversity data Conducted an online survey asking about the respondents’ demographics and research background, their attitudes and experiences regarding biodiversity data sharing, and their expectations regarding future data archiving practices; invitations were sent to specific researchers, and then distributed by communications officers of select scientific societies; there were 372 valid responses (where ¾ of the survey was completed) Measurement, Targeted
Jerrome, N., & Breeze J. (2009).  Imperial College Data Audit Framework Implementation: Final Report. To pilot the Digital Asset Framework Methodology; evaluate the scale and scope of research data; and make recommendations accordingly Used a modified form of the Digital Asset Framework in multiple departments: used the audit framework in a first phase of investigation, then conducted an online survey and follow up interviews. Measurement, Wider
Kroll, S., & Forsman R. (2010).  A Slice of Research Life: Information Support for Research in the United States. Investigated use of tools and services that support of all stages of the research life cycle in institutions of higher education in the U.S. Conducted a literature review and interviews with researchers, research assistants, graduate students, grant and other research administration specialists, and university administrators at four prominent US research institutions Measurement, Wider
Martinez-Uribe, L. (2009).  Using the Data Audit Framework: An Oxford Case Study. Piloted the Digital Asset Framework methodology in work to scope digital repository services for research data management Adapted the Digital Asset Framework methodology Measurement, Wider
McLure, M., Level A., Cranston C., Oehlerts B., & Culbertson M. (2014).  Data Curation: A Study of Researcher Practices and Needs. portal: Libraries and the Academy. 14(2), 139 - 164. Investigated (1) the nature of data sets that researchers create or maintain; (2) How participants manage their data; (3) Needs for support that the participants identify in relation to sharing, curating, and preserving their data; and (4) The feasibility of adapting the Purdue University Libraries’ Data Curation Profiles Toolkit1 interview protocol for use in focus groups with researchers Conducted five focus groups with 31 faculty, research scientists, and research associates Measurement, Wider
Noor, M. A. F., Zimmerman K. J., & Teeter K. C. (2006).  Data Sharing: How Much Doesn't Get Submitted to GenBank?. PLoS Biol. 4(7), e228. Investigated frequency of researcher submission of DNA sequences to journals where their research was published Searched 290 papers in six journals with explicit policies requiring submission of DNA sequences to “GenBank” [Note: “GenBank” here refers to GenBank, the European Molecular Biology Laboratory, and the DNA Databank of Japan] Measurement, Targeted
Open Exeter Project Team (2012).  Summary Findings of the Open Exeter Data Asset Framework Survey. Investigated how researchers at the University of Exeter created data, where they stored their data, whether they backed up their data and what happened to their data when the project was finished Adapted from the Data Curation Centre’s Data Asset Framework methodology, an online survey was created and follow up interviews were conducted with respondents. Measurement, Wider
Parsons, T., Grimshaw S., & Williamson L. (2013).  Research Data Management Survey. Sought to understand the baseline of RDM practices, gather researcher requirements for RDM, and raise awareness of and gauge interest in a proposed service After testing on a smaller population, conducted an online survey of career researchers and post-doctoral researchers at the University of Nottingham using targeted email Measurement, Wider
Pepe, A., Goodman A., Muench A., Crosas M., & Erdmann C. (2014).  How Do Astronomers Share Data? Reliability and Persistence of Datasets Linked in AAS Publications and a Qualitative Study of Data Practices among US Astronomers. PLoS ONE. 9(8), e104798. Investigated data sharing practices of astronomers over the last 15 years Analyzed URL links embedded in papers published by the American Astronomical Society; performed interviews with 12 scientists and online surveys with 173 scientists at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Measurement, Targeted
Perry, C. (2008).  Archiving of publicly funded research data: A survey of Canadian researchers.. Government Information Quarterly. 25(1), 133 - 148. To assess researchers’ attitudes and behaviours in relation to archiving research data and to determine researchers’ views about policies relating to data archiving. Investigated how much of the data being produced in the course of SSHRC-funded research is being archived. Surveyed social sciences and humanities researchers from universities across Canada. A questionnaire comprising 15 questions was mailed to 175 researchers randomly sampled from a publicly available list of 5,821 individuals who had received grants and awards from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). From this sample, 75 (43.4%) responded within the five week time-frame stipulated. The questionnaire was constructed using four existing surveys and asked researchers for information about: geographical location, years of research experience, research funding sources, current plans to archive research data, awareness of archiving policies, attitude to mandated research data archiving, effect of mandatory data archiving policies on grant-seeking, attitude to making archived research data accessible, and use of research data collected by others. The questionnaire also included space for respondents to make comments. Measurement, Wider
Peters, C., & Dryden A. (2011).  Assessing the Academic Library's Role in Campus-Wide Research Data Management: A First Step at the University of Houston. Science & Technology Libraries. 30(4), 387 - 403. Interviewed PIs of significant grants, to assess individuals in as many science and engineering departments as possible, and to obtain information on data management practices from both individual and group-based projects Conducted interviews with PIs of 10 projects (14 contacted), as well as one Co-PI, one post-doctorate and one graduate student associated with one of the projects) Measurement, Wider
Pienta, A. M., Alter G. C., & Lyle J. A. (2010).  The Enduring Value of Social Science Research: The Use and Reuse of Primary Research Data. Investigated the extent to which social science research data are shared and whether data sharing affected research productivity of the research data themselves. Searched NSF and NIH databases to create a database of 7,040 research projects in the social and behavioral sciences funded by NSF and NIH from 1985-2001; surveyed the 4,883 unique PIs for these projects (there was a 24.9% response rate) about research data collected, methods of sharing data, attitudes about data sharing, and demographic information Measurement, Targeted
Piwowar, H. A., & Chapman W. W. (2008).  Identifying Data Sharing in Biomedical Literature. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. 2008, 596 - 600. Investigated extent of data sharing in biomedical research Used national language processing (NLP) techniques to find evidence of dataset sharing within 1,028 open access research that mentioned one or more of five databases Measurement, Targeted
Piwowar, H. A., & Chapman W. W. (2010).  Public sharing of research datasets: a pilot study of associations. Journal of informetrics. 4(2), 148 - 156. Investigated whether data sharing frequency was associated with funder and publisher requirements, journal impact factor, or investigator experience and impact Used a previously-created set of 397 articles in 20 journals describing studies using gene expression microarray data; identified which studies had made their raw datasets available; used multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the association between authorship, grant, and journal attributes of a study and the public availability of its microarray data Measurement, Targeted
Piwowar, H. A. (2011).  Who Shares? Who Doesn't? Factors Associated with Openly Archiving Raw Research Data. PLoS ONE. 6(7), e18657. Investigated patterns in the frequency with which researchers openly archive raw gene expression microarray datasets after research publication Performed a full-text query of 5 databases to identify 11,603 articles published between 2000 and 2009 that describe the creation of gene expression microarray data; performed multivariate regression on 124 bibliometric attributes of the articles, which revealed 15 factors describing authorship, funding, institution, publication, and domain environments. Measurement, Targeted
Read, K. B., Sheehan J. R., Huerta M. F., Knecht L. S., Mork J. G., Humphreys B. L., et al. (2015).  Sizing the Problem of Improving Discovery and Access to NIH-Funded Data: A Preliminary Study. PLoS ONE. 10(7), e0132735. Investigated the discovery of and access to biomedical datasets to provide a preliminary estimate of the number and type of datasets generated annually by research funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH); specifically those that are “invisible” or not deposited in a known repository Analyzed NIH-funded journal articles that were published in 2011, cited in PubMed and deposited in PubMed Central (PMC) to identify articles where data were submitted to a known repository; excluded these and analyzed a random sample of the remaining articles to estimate how many and what types of invisible datasets were used in each article Measurement, Targeted
Science Staff (2011).  Challenges and Opportunities. Science. 331(6018), 692 - 693. Investigated issues surrounding the growing amounts of research data that exist Performed a survey of Science peer reviewers, receiving 1,700 responses; asked about frequency of use of datasets from published literature and archival databases, the size of the largest dataset used or generated, where most of the data they generate is archived, whether they have asked colleagues for research data, whether the data were provided, whether there is adequate expertise in their lab or group to analyze their data in the way desired, and whether there is sufficient funding for data curation in their group Measurement, Targeted
Tenopir, C., Allard S., Douglass K., Aydinoglu A., Wu L., Read E., et al. (2011).  Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and Perceptions. PLoS ONE. 6(6), e21101. Investigated scientists’ data sharing practices and their perceptions of the barriers and enablers of data sharing Conducted an internet survey including questions about demographics and questions about scientists’ relationship with data; the survey was distributed initially using a snowball approach (contacting specific individuals who could promote the survey) and then by targeting universities in states with a low response rate. In all 1,329 respondents answered at least one question (an estimated response rate of 9%) Measurement, Targeted
Tenopir, C., Dalton E. D., Allard S., Frame M., Pjesivac I., Birch B., et al. (2015).  Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide. PLoS ONE. 10(8), e0134826. Examined the state of data sharing and reuse perceptions and practices among research scientists as compared to the 2009/2010 baseline study (reported in Tenopir et al. 2011); examined differences in practices and perceptions across age groups, geographic regions, and subject disciplines Used snowball and volunteer sampling approaches to recruit respondents to an online survey; the survey was also distributed via a variety of listservs Measurement, Targeted
UNC-CH (2012).  Research Data Stewardship at UNC: Recommendations for Scholarly Practice and Leadership. Sought to identify policy options for digital research data stewardship at UNC; further understanding of the full-breadth of activities, concerns, and opinions surrounding research data stewardship among researchers at UNC-CH Conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 faculty researchers representing several disciplines at UNC-CH; conducted an online survey of all faculty members, graduate students, and staff assigned to departments that engage in research Measurement, Wider
Wallis, J. C., Rolando E., & Borgman C. L. (2013).  If We Share Data, Will Anyone Use Them? Data Sharing and Reuse in the Long Tail of Science and Technology. PLoS ONE. 8(7), e67332. Investigated data sharing practices among scientists and technology researchers in CENS, a National Science Foundation Science and Technology Center. This was done as part of efforts to identify infrastructure needs for research data produced in long tail science. Conducted two rounds of interviews with researchers, students, and staff in CENS in the fourth and eighth years of the study, and ten years of ethnographic observation Measurement, Targeted
Wicherts, J. M., Bakker M., & Molenaar D. (2011).  Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results. PLoS ONE. 6(11), e26828. Investigated reasons for researchers’ reluctance to share data from published research Related the willingness to share data (as experienced by requesting data from the authors of 49 papers published in two high-ranked APA journals) to the internal consistency of the statistical results in the papers and the distribution of significantly reported (p<.05) p-values Measurement, Targeted
Bigagli, L., Sveinsdottir T., Wessels B., Smallwood R., Linde P., Tsoukala V., et al. (2014).  Infrastructural and technological challenges and potential solutions. Investigated infrastructural and technological barriers to Open Access and preservation of research data in Europe. This work was conducted within the EU FP7 funded project RECODE, which focuses on developing policy recommendations for Open Access to Research Data in Europe. In particular, this work is coordinated by RECODE Work Package 2 (WP2), Infrastructure and technology. It distinguishes between different categories of stakeholders in terms of how the experience and respond to these challenges Conducted desk research, an online survey, interviews, and a validation workshop Measurement, Metrics, Wider
Finn, R., Wadhwa K., Taylor M. J., Sveinsdottir T., Noorman M., & Sondervan J. (2014).  Legal and ethical barriers and good practice solutions. Identify legal and ethical issues relevant to open access to research data in Europe, identify examples that illuminate these issues, and identify potential solutions currently being used to address these issues Conducted a literature review, five disciplinary case studies, and a validation workshop Measurement, Wider
Subscribe to SA: Sharing and Access