More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

article

The conundrum of sharing research data

Author:

Christine L. BorgmanAuthors Info & Claims

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Volume 63, Issue 6

Pages 1059 - 1078

https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22634

Published: 01 June 2012 Publication History

Abstract

We must all accept that science is data and that data are science, and thus provide for, and justify the need for the support of, much-improved data curation. (Hanson, Sugden, & Alberts)

Researchers are producing an unprecedented deluge of data by using new methods and instrumentation. Others may wish to mine these data for new discoveries and innovations. However, research data are not readily available as sharing is common in only a few fields such as astronomy and genomics. Data sharing practices in other fields vary widely. Moreover, research data take many forms, are handled in many ways, using many approaches, and often are difficult to interpret once removed from their initial context. Data sharing is thus a conundrum. Four rationales for sharing data are examined, drawing examples from the sciences, social sciences, and humanities: (1) to reproduce or to verify research, (2) to make results of publicly funded research available to the public, (3) to enable others to ask new questions of extant data, and (4) to advance the state of research and innovation. These rationales differ by the arguments for sharing, by beneficiaries, and by the motivations and incentives of the many stakeholders involved. The challenges are to understand which data might be shared, by whom, with whom, under what conditions, why, and to what effects. Answers will inform data policy and practice. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

References

[1]

Abrams, S., Cruse, P., & Kunze, J. (2009). Preservation is not a place. International Journal of Digital Curation, 4(1), 8––21.

[2]

Anderson, C. (2008). The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Retrieved from

[3]

Aronova, E., Baker, K.S., & Oreskes, N. (2010). Big science and big data in biology: From the International Geophysical Year through the International Biological Program to the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network, 1957–Present. Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 40(2), 183–224.

[4]

Association of Research Libraries. (2009). The university's role in the dissemination of research and scholarship. Retrieved from

[5]

Beaudouin-Lafon, M. (2010). Open access to scientific publications: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 53(2), 32–34.

Digital Library

[6]

Bell, G., Hey, T., & Szalay, A. (2009). Beyond the data deluge. Science, 323, 1297––1298.

[7]

Berman, F., Lavoie, B., Ayris, P., Choudhury, G.S., Cohen, E., Courant, P., … Van Camp, A. (2010). Sustainable economics for a digital planet: Ensuring long-term access to digital information. Retrieved from

[8]

Berman, H.M., Westbrook, J., Feng, J., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T.N., Wessig, H., … Bourne, P.E. (2000). The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Research, 28, 235–242.

[9]

Borgman, C.L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[10]

Borgman, C.L. (2009). The digital future is now: A call to action for the humanities. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 3(4), 233.

[11]

Borgman, C.L. (2010). Research data: Who will share what, with whom, when, and why? Retrieved from and

[12]

Borgman, C.L. (2011). Why are the attribution and citation of scientific data important? (keynote). Retrieved from

[13]

Borgman, C.L., Bowker, G.C., Finholt, T.A., & Wallis, J.C. (2009). Towards a virtual organization for data cyberinfrastructure. Proceedings of the 9th Annual International ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital libraries (JCDL ’09) (pp. 353–356). New York: ACM.

[14]

Borgman, C.L., Wallis, J.C., & Enyedy, N. (2006). Building digital libraries for scientific data: An exploratory study of data practices in habitat ecology. 10th European Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 170–183), Alicante, Spain. Berlin: Springer.

[15]

Borgman, C L., Wallis, J.C., & Enyedy, N. (2007). Little Science confronts the data deluge: Habitat ecology, embedded sensor networks, and digital libraries. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 7(1–2), 17–30.

Digital Library

[16]

Borgman, C.L., Wallis, J.C., Mayernik, M.S., & Pepe, A. (2007). Drowning in data: Digital library architecture to support scientific use of embedded sensor networks. Proceedings of the 7th Annual International ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital libraries (JCDL ’07) (pp. 269–277). New York: ACM.

[17]

Bourne, P. (2005). Will a biological database be different from a biological journal? PLoS Computational Biology, 1(3), e34.

[18]

Bowker, G.C. (2000). Biodiversity datadiversity. Social Studies of Science, 30(5), 643–683.

[19]

Bowker, G.C. (2005). Memory practices in the sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[20]

Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2011). Six provocations for big data. Retrieved from

[21]

Boyle, J. (2004). A natural experiment. Retrieved from

[22]

Boyle, J., & Jenkins, J. (2003). The genius of intellectual property and the need for the public domain. In Esanu, J.M. & Uhlir, P.F. (Eds.). The role of scientific and technical data and information in the public domain (pp. 10––14). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

[23]

British Library (2009). Patterns of information use and exchange: case studies of researchers in the life sciences. Retrieved from .

[24]

Brumfiel, G. (2002). Misconduct finding at Bell Labs shakes physics community. Nature, 419(6906), 419–421.

[25]

Buckland, M.K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 351–360.

[26]

Buneman, P., Khanna, S., & Tan, W.-C. (2000). Data provenance: Some basic issues. Foundations of software technology and theoretical computer science: Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 87–93). Berlin: Springer.

[27]

Butler, D. (2006). Mashups mix data into global service: Is this the future for scientific analysis? Nature, 439(7072), 6–7.

[28]

Campbell, E.G., Clarridge, B.R., Gokhale, M., Birenbaum, L., Hilgartner, S., Holtzman, N.A., & Blumenthal, D. (2002). Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(4), 473–480.

[29]

Claerbout, J. (2010). Reproducible computational research: A history of hurdles, mostly overcome. Retrieved from

[30]

Collins, H.M. (1975). The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9, 205–224.

[31]

Collins, H.M. (1983). The sociology of scientific knowledge: Studies of contemporary science. Annual Review of Sociology, 9(1), 265–285.

[32]

Collins, H.M. (1998). The meaning of data: Open and closed evidential cultures in the search for gravitational waves. American Journal of Sociology, 104(2), 293–338.

[33]

Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. (2002). Reference model for an open archival information system. Recommendation for Space Data System Standards: Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems Secretariat, Program Integration Division (Code M-3), National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Retrieved from

[34]

Cornell Lab of Ornithology. (2009). Citizen Science. Retrieved from

[35]

Costello, A., Maslin, M., Montgomery, H., Johnson, A.M., & Ekins, P. (2011). Global health and climate change: Moving from denial and catastrophic fatalism to positive action. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 369, 1866–1882.

[36]

Couzin, J., & Unger, C. (2006). Cleaning up the paper trail. Science, 312, 38––43.

[37]

Couzin-Frankel, J. (2010). As questions grow, Duke halts trials, launches investigation. Science, 329, 614–615.

[38]

Cragin, M.H., Palmer, C.L., Carlson, J.R., & Witt, M. (2010). Data sharing, small science and institutional repositories. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368(1926), 4023–4038.

[39]

Crow, R. (2009). Income models for open access: An overview of current practice. Retrieved from

[40]

Dalrymple, D. (2003). Scientific knowledge as a global public good: Contributions to innovation and the economy. In Esanu, J.M. & Uhlir, P.F. (Eds.). The role of scientific and technical data and information in the public domain (pp. 35––51). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

[41]

Data Citation Standards and Practices. (2010). International Council for Science: Committee on Data for Science and Technology. Retrieved from

[42]

Data Conservancy. (2010). Johns Hopkins University. Retrieved from

[43]

David, P.A. (2004). Towards a cyberinfrastructure for enhanced scientific collaboration: Providing its ‘soft’ foundations may be the hardest part. Retrieved from

[44]

Digital Curation Centre. (2011). DCC data management plans. Retrieved from

[45]

Directory of Open Access Journals. (2009). Open society initiative, scholarly publishing and academic resources coalition. Retrieved from

[46]

Drake, A.J., Djorgovski, S.G., Mahabal, A., Anderson, J., Roy, R., Mohan, V., … Christensen, E. (2011). The discovery and nature of optical transient. Retrieved from

[47]

Dryad. (2011). Joint data archiving policy. Retrieved from

[48]

eBird. (2009). Cornell Lab of Ornithology and Audobon Society. Retrieved from

[49]

Economic and Social Research Council. (2010). ESRC research data policy. Retrieved from

[50]

The Economist. (2010). Data, data everywhere. Retrieved from

[51]

Edwards, P.N. (2010). A vast machine: Computer models, climate data, and the politics of global warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[52]

Edwards, P.N., Mayernik, M.S., Batcheller, A.L., Bowker, G.C., & Borgman, C.L. (2011). Science friction: Data, metadata, and collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 667––690.

[53]

Esanu, J.M,. & Uhlir, P.F. (Eds.). (2003). The role of scientific and technical data and information in the public domain: Proceedings of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

[54]

Esanu, J.M., & Uhlir, P F. (Eds.). (2004). Open access and the public domain in digital data and information for science: Proceedings of an International Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

[55]

European Marine Observation and Data Network. (2011). Retrieved from

[56]

Faniel, I.M., & Jacobsen, T E. (2010). Reusing scientific data: how earthquake engineering researchers assess the reusability of colleagues’ data. Journal of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 19(3–4), 355–375.

Digital Library

[57]

Fazackerley, A. (2004). Wellcome embraces open access future. Times Higher Education Supplement, 1665(5), 5.

[58]

Federal Research Public Access Act of 2012. H.R. 4004, 111th Congress. Retrieved from

[59]

Fienberg, S.E., Martin, M.E., & Straf, M.L. (Eds.). (1985). Sharing research data. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

[60]

Fischer, B.A., & Zigmond, M.J. (2010). The essential nature of sharing in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16(4), 783––799.

[61]

Galaxy Zoo. (2011). Retrieved from

[62]

GenomeCanada. (2005). Genome Canada data release and sharing policy. Retrieved from

[63]

GEON. (2011). Retrieved from

[64]

Gil, Y. (2010). Provenance XG final report. Retrieved from

[65]

Gleick, P.H. (2011). Climate change and the integrity of science (Letter to editor; 255 signatories). Science, 328, 689–690.

[66]

Goble, C., & De Roure, D. (2009). The impact of workflow tools on data-intensive research. In Hey, T., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. (Eds.). The fourth paradigm: Data-intensive scientific discovery. Retrieved from

[67]

Gobler, C.J., Boneillo, G.E., Debenham, C.J., & Caron, D.A. (2004). Nutrient limitation, organic matter cycling, and plankton dynamics during an Aureococcus anophagefferens bloom. Aquatic Microbial Ecolology, 35, 31–43.

[68]

Gray, J., Liu, D.T., Nieto-Santisteban, M., Szalay, A., DeWitt, D., & Heber, G. (2005). Scientific data management in the coming decade. CT Watch Quarterly, 1(1).

[69]

Haeussler, C. (2011). Information-sharing in academia and the industry: A comparative study. Research Policy, 40(1) 105–122.

[70]

Hanson, B., Sugden, A., & Alberts, B. (2011). Making data maximally available. Science, 331(6018), 649––649.

[71]

Hey, A.J.G., & Trefethen, A. (2003). The data deluge: An e-science perspective. In Berman, F., Fox, G., & Hey, A.J.G. (Eds.). Grid computing: Making the global infrastructure a reality. Chichester: Wiley.

[72]

Hey, T., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. (Eds.). (2009). The fourth paradigm: Data-intensive scientific discovery. Retrieved from

[73]

Hilgartner, S. (1997). Access to Data and Intellectual Property: Scientific Exchange in Genome Research. Intellectual Property Rights and the Dissemination of Research Tools in Molecular Biology. Summary of a Workshop Held at the National Academy of Sciences (pp. 28–39), February 15–16, 1996. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

[74]

Hilgartner, S. (1998). Data access policy in genome research. In Thakray, A. (Ed.) (pp. 202–218). Private science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[75]

Hilgartner, S. (2002). Acceptable intellectual property. Journal of Molecular Biology, 319(4), 943–946.

[76]

Hilgartner, S., & Brandt-Rauf, S.I. (1994). Data access, ownership and control: Toward empirical studies of access practices. Knowledge, 15, 355–372.

[77]

Hunter, J., & Cheung, K. (2007). Provenance Explorer-a graphical interface for constructing scientific publication packages from provenance trails. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 7(1), 99–107.

Digital Library

[78]

INSPIRE. (2007). European Commission. Retrieved from

[79]

Ioannidis, J.P.A., & Khoury, M.J. (2011). Improving validation practices in ““omics” research. Science, 334(6060), 1230–1232.

[80]

Jasny, B. R., Chin, G., Chong, L., & Vignieri, S. (2011). Again, and again, and again. Science, 334(6060), 1225.

[81]

Kaiser, J. (2008). Scientific publishing–Uncle Sam's biomedical archive wants your papers. Science, 319(5861), 266.

[82]

Kanfer, A.G., Haythornthwaite, C., Bruce, B.C., Bowker, G.C., Burbules, N C., Porac, J.F., & Wade, J. (2000). Modeling distributed knowledge processes in next generation multidisciplinary alliances. Information Systems Frontiers, 2(3–4), 317–331.

[83]

Kansa, E.C., Kansa, S.W., Burton, M.M., & Stankowski, C. (2010). Googling the grey: Open data, web services, and semantics. Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress, 6(2), 301–326.

[84]

Karasti, H., Baker, K.S., & Halkola, E. (2006). Enriching the notion of data curation in e-Science: Data managing and information infrastructuring in the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(4), 321–358.

Digital Library

[85]

Karasti, H., Baker, K.S., & Millerand, F. (2010). Infrastructure time: Long-term matters in collaborative development. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19(3–4), 377–415.

Digital Library

[86]

Kelty, C.M. (2008). Two bits: The cultural significance of free software. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

[87]

Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[88]

Lagoze, C., & Velden, T. (2009a). Communicating chemistry. Nature Chemistry, 1, 673––678.

[89]

Lagoze, C., & Velden, T. (2009b). The value of new scientific communication models for chemistry. Retrieved from

[90]

Large Synoptic Sky Telescope. (2010). Retrieved from

[91]

Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[92]

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills: Sage.

[93]

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

[94]

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

[95]

Lyon, L. (2007). Dealing with data: Roles, rights, responsibilities, and relationships. Retrieved from

[96]

Mayernik, M.S. (2011). Metadata realities for cyberinfrastructure: data authors as metadata creators (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). UCLA, Los Angeles. Retrieved from

[97]

Mayernik, M.S., Batcheller, A.L., & Borgman, C.L. (2011). How institutional factors influence the creation of scientific metadata. Proceedings of the 2011 iConference (iConference ’11) (pp. 417–425). New York: ACM.

[98]

Meng, X.-L. (2010). Multi-party inference and uncongeniality. In Lovric, M. (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

[99]

Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary. (2005). (11th ed.). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

[100]

Merton, R.K. (1969). Behavior patterns of scientists. American Scientist, 57(1), 1–23.

[101]

Merton, R.K. (1973). The normative structure of science. In Storer, N.W. (Ed.), The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 267–278). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[102]

Moore, A.J., McPeek, M.A., Rausher, M.D., Rieseberg, L., & Whitlock, M.C. (2010). The need for archiving data in evolutionary biology. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23(4), 659–660.

[103]

Murray-Rust, P., & Rzepa, H.S. (2004). The next big thing: From hypermedia to datuments. Journal of Digital Information, 5(1), Article No. 248.

[104]

Naik, G. (2011). Scientists’ elusive goal: Reproducing study results. Wall Street Journal, CCLVIII(130), A1, A16.

[105]

National Academies of Science. (2011). Developing Data Attribution and Citation Practices and Standards: An International Symposium and Workshop. Berkeley, CA, US CODATA and the Board on Research Data and Information, in collaboration with CODATA-ICSTI Task Group on Data Citation Standards and Practices. Retrieved from

[106]

National Ecological Observatory Network. (2010). Retrieved from

[107]

National Institutes of Health. (2005). Public access policy. Retrieved from

[108]

National Research Council. (1995). Preserving scientific data on our physical universe: A new strategy for archiving the nation's scientific information resources. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

[109]

National Research Council. (1997). Bits of power: Issues in global access to scientific data. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

[110]

National Research Council. (1999). A question of balance: Private rights and the public interest in scientific and technical databases. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

[111]

National Research Council. (2009). Ensuring the integrity, accessibility, and stewardship of research data in the digital age. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

[112]

National Science Board. (2005). Long-lived digital data collections. Retrieved from

[113]

National Science Foundation. (2001). Grant policy manual. Retrieved from

[114]

National Science Foundation. (2010a). NSF data management plans. Retrieved from

[115]

National Science Foundation. (2010b). NSF data sharing policy. Retrieved from

[116]

National Science Foundation. (2010c). Sustainable digital data preservation and access network partners. Retrieved from

[117]

National Science Foundation. (2011). NSF proposal preparation instructions. Award and Administrative Guide. Retrieved from

[118]

Nature. (2008). Community cleverness required.

[119]

Nature. (2009). Data's shameful neglect.

[120]

Networking and Information Technology Research and Development. (2009). Harnessing the power of digital data for science and society. January 2009 Report of the Interagency Working Group on Digital Data to the Committee on Science of the National Science and Technology Council. Retrieved from

[121]

Normile, D., Vogel, G., & Couzin, J. (2006). Cloning——South Korean team's remaining human stem cell claim demolished. Science, 311(5758), 156–157.

[122]

Office of the Federal Register. (2011). Science and technology policy office. Request for Information: Public Access to Digital Data Resulting From Federally Funded Scientific Research. Retrieved from

[123]

Olson, G.M., Zimmerman, A., & Bos, N. (Eds.). (2008). Scientific collaboration on the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[124]

Open Content Alliance. (2009). Retrieved from

[125]

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). OECD principles and guidelines for access to research data frompublic funding. 1–24. Retrieved from

[126]

Osterlund, C., & Carlile, P. (2005). Relations in practice: Sorting through practice theories on knowledge sharing in complex organizations. The Information Society, 21(2), 91–107.

[127]

Overpeck, J.T., Meehl, G.A., Bony, S., & Easterling, D.R. (2011). Climate data challenges in the 21st century. Science, 331(6018), 700––702.

[128]

Palmer, C.L. (2005). Scholarly work and the shaping of digital access. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(11), 1140–1153.

Digital Library

[129]

Palmer, C.L., Cragin, M.H., Heidorn, P.B,. & Smith, L.C. (2007). Studies of data curation for the long tail of science. Third International Digital Curation Conference, Washington, DC, Digital Curation Center. Retrieved from

[130]

Panoramic Survey Telescope & Rapid Response System. (2009). Retrieved from

[131]

Peng, R.D. (2011). Reproducible research in computational science. Science, 334(6060), 1226–1227.

[132]

Pepe, A., Mayernik, M.S., Borgman, C.L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2010). From artifacts to aggregations: Modeling scientific life cycles on the semantic web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(3), 567–582.

Digital Library

[133]

Piwowar, H.A., Becich, M.J., Bilofsky, H., & Crowley, R.S. (2008). Towards a data sharing culture: Recommendations for leadership from academic health centers. PLoS Medicine, 5(9), 1315–1319.

[134]

Piwowar, H.A., & Chapman, W.W. (2010). Public sharing of research datasets: A pilot study of associations. Journal of Informetrics, 4(2), 148–156.

[135]

Piwowar, H.A., Day, R.S., & Fridsma, D.B. (2007). Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate. PLoS One, 2(3), e308.

[136]

Porter, J.H. (2010). A brief history of data sharing in the U.S. Long Term Ecological Research Network. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 91, 14–20.

[137]

Pritchard, S.M., Carver, L., & Anand, S. (2004). Collaboration for knowledge management and campus informatics. Retrieved from

[138]

Protein Data Bank. (2011). Retrieved from

[139]

Reichman, J.H., & Uhlir, P.F. (2003). A contractually reconstructed research commons for scientific data in a highly protectionist intellectual property environment. Law and Contemporary Problems, 66(1&2), 315––462.

[140]

Renear, A.H., & Palmer, C.L. (2009). Strategic reading, ontologies, and the future of scientific publishing. Science, 325(5942), 828––832.

[141]

Renear, A.H., Sacchi, S., & Wickett, K.M. (2010). Definitions of dataset in the scientific and technical literature. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47, 1–4.

[142]

Reproducible research: Addressing the need for data and code sharing in computational science. (2010). Computing in Science & Engineering, 12(5), 8––12.

Digital Library

[143]

Research Information Network. (2009). Patterns of information use and exchange: Case studies of researchers in the life sciences (2009). Retrieved from

[144]

Ribes, D., Baker, K.S., Millerand, F., & Bowker, G.C. (2005). Comparative interoperability project: Configurations of community, technology, organization. Proceedings of the Second ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. New York: ACM.

[145]

Ribes, D., & Bowker, G.C. (2008). Organizing for multidisciplinary collaboration: The case of the Geosciences Network. In Olson, G.M., Zimmerman, A., & Bos, N. (Eds.). Science on the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[146]

Ribes, D., & Finholt, T.A. (2007). Tensions across the scales: Planning infrastructure for the long-term. Proceedings of the 2007 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, FL (pp. 229–238). New York: ACM.

[147]

Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.

[148]

Ryan, M.J. (2011). Replication in field biology: The case of the frog-eating bat. Science, 334(6060), 1229–1230.

[149]

Santer, B.D., Wigley, T.M.L., & Taylor, K.E. (2011). The reproducibility of observational estimates of surface and atmospheric temperature change. Science, 334(6060), 1232–1233.

[150]

Science. (2011). Dealing with data.

[151]

SeaDataNet. (2009). Retrieved from

[152]

Sloan Digital Sky Survey. (2010). Retrieved from

[153]

Stodden, V. (2009a). Enabling reproducible research: Open licensing for scientific innovation. Retrieved from

[154]

Stodden, V. (2009b). The legal framework for reproducible scientific research: Licensing and copyright. Computing in Science and Engineering, 11(1), 35–4017.

Digital Library

[155]

Tomasello, M., & Call, J. (2011). Methodological challenges in the study of primate cognition. Science, 334(6060), 1227––1228.

[156]

Uhlir, P.F., & Cohen, D. (2011). Internal document. Board on Research Data and Information, Policy and Global Affairs Division, National Academy of Sciences. 18 March 2011.

[157]

Unsworth, J., Courant, P., Fraser, S., Goodchild, M., Hedstrom, M., Henry, C., … Zuckerman, B. (2006). Our cultural commonwealth: The Report of the American Council of Learned Societies Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for Humanities and Social Sciences. Retrieved from

[158]

U.S. Long Term Ecological Research Network. (2010). Retrieved from

[159]

Van House, N.A. (2004). Science and technology studies and information studies. In Cronin, B. (Ed.). Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Medford, NJ, Information Today, 38, 3–86.

[160]

Vandewalle, P., Kovacevic, J., & Vetterli, M. (2009). Reproducible research in signal processing. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 26(3), 37––47.

[161]

Wallis, J.C., Mayernik, M.S., Borgman, C.L., & Pepe, A. (2010). Digital libraries for scientific data discovery and reuse: From vision to practical reality. New York: ACM.

[162]

Ware, M. (2010). Submission fees—A tool in the transition to open access? Knowledge Exchange, 1–13.

[163]

Wellcome Trust. (1996). Summary of principles. Retrieved from

[164]

Wellcome Trust. (1997). Wellcome Trust statement on genome data release. Retrieved from

[165]

Wellcome Trust. (2001). Wellcome Trust policy on access to bioinformatics resources by trust-funded researchers. Retrieved from

[166]

Wellcome Trust. (2003). Sharing data from large-scale biological research projects: A system of tripartite responsibility. Retrieved from

[167]

Wellcome Trust. (2005). Wellcome Trust position statement in support of open and unrestricted access to published research. Retrieved from

[168]

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

[169]

What's Invasive! (2011). Retrieved from

[170]

Whitlock, M.C. (2011). Data archiving in ecology and evolution: Best practices. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 26(2), 61––65.

[171]

Whitlock, M.C., McPeek, M.A., Rausher, M.D., Rieseberg, L., & Moore, A. J. (2010). Data archiving. American Naturalist, 175(2), E45––146.

[172]

Wilbanks, J. (2009). I have seen the paradigm shift and it is us. In Hey, T., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. (Eds.), The fourth paradigm: Data-intensive scientific discovery. Retrieved from

[173]

Witt, M., Carlson, J., Brandt, D.S., & Cragin, M.H. (2009). Constructing data curation profiles. International Journal of Digital Curation, 4(3), 93––103.

[174]

Wynholds, L. (2010). Linking to scientific data: identity problems of unruly and poorly bounded digital objects. Digital Curation Conference, Chicago. Retrieved from .

[175]

Wynholds, L., Fearon Jr, D.S., Borgman, C L., & Traweek, S. (2011). When use cases are not useful: Data practices, astronomy, and digital libraries. Proceedings of the 11th Annual International ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital libraries (JCDL ’11) (pp. 383–386). New York: ACM.

[176]

Young, J.R. (2009). Physicists set plan in motion to change publishing system. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(21), A1-.

[177]

Zimmerman, A.S. (2007). Not by metadata alone: The use of diverse forms of knowledge to locate data for reuse. International Journal of Digital Libraries, 7(1–2), 5–16.

Digital Library

Cited By

Frazier JWeinstein EIzydorczak IWu YCuadros NSur DMorrison-Smith S(2025)DriveGroups: Using Group Perspective for Usable Data Sharing in Research CollaborationsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/37011929:1(1-28)Online publication date: 10-Jan-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3701192
Costa LBarbosa SCunha J(2024)Evaluating Tools for Enhancing Reproducibility in Computational Scientific ExperimentsProceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Reproducibility and Replicability10.1145/3641525.3663623(46-51)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641525.3663623
Tseng EBellini RLee YRamjit ARistenpart TDell N(2024)Data Stewardship in Clinical Computer Security: Balancing Benefit and Burden in Participatory SystemsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373168:CSCW1(1-29)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637316
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Research data sharing: Developing a stakeholder-driven model for journal policies

Conclusions of research articles depend on bodies of data that cannot be included in articles themselves. To share this data is important for reasons of both transparency and reuse. Science, Technology, and Medicine journals have a role in facilitating ...
Data sharing for the advancement of science: Overcoming barriers for citizen scientists

Systematic study of data sharing by citizen scientists will make a significant contribution to science because of the growing importance of aggregated data in data-intensive science. This article expands on the data sharing component of a paper ...
The practical politics of sharing personal data

The focus of this paper is upon how people handle the sharing of personal data as an interactional concern. A number of ethnographic studies of domestic environments are drawn upon in order to articulate a range of circumstances under which data may be ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology Volume 63, Issue 6

June 2012

222 pages

ISSN:1532-2882

Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 June 2012

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

99
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 23 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Frazier JWeinstein EIzydorczak IWu YCuadros NSur DMorrison-Smith S(2025)DriveGroups: Using Group Perspective for Usable Data Sharing in Research CollaborationsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/37011929:1(1-28)Online publication date: 10-Jan-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3701192
Costa LBarbosa SCunha J(2024)Evaluating Tools for Enhancing Reproducibility in Computational Scientific ExperimentsProceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Reproducibility and Replicability10.1145/3641525.3663623(46-51)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641525.3663623
Tseng EBellini RLee YRamjit ARistenpart TDell N(2024)Data Stewardship in Clinical Computer Security: Balancing Benefit and Burden in Participatory SystemsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373168:CSCW1(1-29)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637316
Cugnata FBrombin CPoli CBuccione RDi Serio C(2024)Modelling perception and resilience factors to data sharing in clinical and basic research: an observational studyScientometrics10.1007/s11192-024-05015-1129:6(3169-3192)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-024-05015-1
Winthereik B(2024)Data as Relation: Ontological Trouble in the Data-Driven Public AdministrationComputer Supported Cooperative Work10.1007/s10606-023-09480-933:3(371-388)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10606-023-09480-9
Castro Fernandez R(2023)Data-Sharing Markets: Model, Protocol, and Algorithms to Incentivize the Formation of Data-Sharing ConsortiaProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data10.1145/35893171:2(1-25)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3589317
Zhang LMa L(2023)Is open science a double-edged sword?: data sharing and the changing citation pattern of Chinese economics articlesScientometrics10.1007/s11192-023-04684-8128:5(2803-2818)Online publication date: 21-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-023-04684-8
Mosconi Gde Carvalho ASyed HRandall DKarasti HPipek V(2023)Fostering Research Data Management in Collaborative Research Contexts: Lessons learnt from an ‘Embedded’ Evaluation of ‘Data Story’Computer Supported Cooperative Work10.1007/s10606-023-09467-632:4(911-949)Online publication date: 15-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10606-023-09467-6
Sharma SObregon AShaikh ZTian YFinn MAcker A(2023)Evaluating Tools for Data Management Plans: A Comparative Study of the DART Rubric and the Belmont ScorecardInformation for a Better World: Normality, Virtuality, Physicality, Inclusivity10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_3(26-46)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_3
Li WZhang PWang J(2023)Humanities Scholars' Understanding of Data and the Implications for Humanities Data CurationProceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology10.1002/pra2.93660:1(1034-1036)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/pra2.936
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents