IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0189288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudes and norms affecting scientists’ data reuse

Author

Listed:
  • Renata Gonçalves Curty
  • Kevin Crowston
  • Alison Specht
  • Bruce W Grant
  • Elizabeth D Dalton

Abstract

The value of sharing scientific research data is widely appreciated, but factors that hinder or prompt the reuse of data remain poorly understood. Using the Theory of Reasoned Action, we test the relationship between the beliefs and attitudes of scientists towards data reuse, and their self-reported data reuse behaviour. To do so, we used existing responses to selected questions from a worldwide survey of scientists developed and administered by the DataONE Usability and Assessment Working Group (thus practicing data reuse ourselves). Results show that the perceived efficacy and efficiency of data reuse are strong predictors of reuse behaviour, and that the perceived importance of data reuse corresponds to greater reuse. Expressed lack of trust in existing data and perceived norms against data reuse were not found to be major impediments for reuse contrary to our expectations. We found that reported use of models and remotely-sensed data was associated with greater reuse. The results suggest that data reuse would be encouraged and normalized by demonstration of its value. We offer some theoretical and practical suggestions that could help to legitimize investment and policies in favor of data sharing.

Suggested Citation

  • Renata Gonçalves Curty & Kevin Crowston & Alison Specht & Bruce W Grant & Elizabeth D Dalton, 2017. "Attitudes and norms affecting scientists’ data reuse," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0189288
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189288
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189288&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0189288?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. O J Reichman, 2004. "NCEAS: Promoting Creative Collaborations," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(3), pages 1-1, March.
    2. Heather A Piwowar & Roger S Day & Douglas B Fridsma, 2007. "Sharing Detailed Research Data Is Associated with Increased Citation Rate," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(3), pages 1-5, March.
    3. Carol Tenopir & Elizabeth D Dalton & Suzie Allard & Mike Frame & Ivanka Pjesivac & Ben Birch & Danielle Pollock & Kristina Dorsett, 2015. "Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Dominique G Roche & Robert Lanfear & Sandra A Binning & Tonya M Haff & Lisa E Schwanz & Kristal E Cain & Hanna Kokko & Michael D Jennions & Loeske E B Kruuk, 2014. "Troubleshooting Public Data Archiving: Suggestions to Increase Participation," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-5, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elizabeth Martín-Mora & Shari Ellis & Lawrence M Page, 2020. "Use of web-based species occurrence information systems by academics and government professionals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-41, July.
    2. Pablo Dorta-González & Sara M. González-Betancor & María Isabel Dorta-González, 2021. "To what extent is researchers' data-sharing motivated by formal mechanisms of recognition and credit?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2209-2225, March.
    3. Bettina Suhr & Johanna Dungl & Alexander Stocker, 2020. "Search, reuse and sharing of research data in materials science and engineering—A qualitative interview study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-26, September.
    4. Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez & Flavio Hourneaux Junior & Marcelo Luiz Dias da Silva Gabriel & Luis Enrique Valdez-Juárez, 2021. "On Earth as It Is in Heaven: Proxy Measurements to Assess Sustainable Development Goals at the Company Level through CSR Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    5. Anneke Zuiderwijk & Rhythima Shinde & Wei Jeng, 2020. "What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-49, September.
    6. Carol Tenopir & Natalie M Rice & Suzie Allard & Lynn Baird & Josh Borycz & Lisa Christian & Bruce Grant & Robert Olendorf & Robert J Sandusky, 2020. "Data sharing, management, use, and reuse: Practices and perceptions of scientists worldwide," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, March.
    7. Kyle R. Myers & Wei Yang Tham & Jerry Thursby & Marie Thursby & Nina Cohodes & Karim Lakhani & Rachel Mural & Yilun Xu, 2023. "New Facts and Data about Professors and their Research," Papers 2312.01442, arXiv.org.
    8. Kyle Myers & Wei Yang Tham, 2023. "Money, Time, and Grant Design," Papers 2312.06479, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shibayama, Sotaro & Lawson, Cornelia, 2021. "The use of rewards in the sharing of research resources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    2. Mike Thelwall & Marcus Munafò & Amalia Mas-Bleda & Emma Stuart & Meiko Makita & Verena Weigert & Chris Keene & Nushrat Khan & Katie Drax & Kayvan Kousha, 2020. "Is useful research data usually shared? An investigation of genome-wide association study summary statistics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-11, February.
    3. Stefan Reichmann & Thomas Klebel & Ilire Hasani‐Mavriqi & Tony Ross‐Hellauer, 2021. "Between administration and research: Understanding data management practices in an institutional context," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(11), pages 1415-1431, November.
    4. Hyoungjoo Park & Dietmar Wolfram, 2017. "An examination of research data sharing and re-use: implications for data citation practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 443-461, April.
    5. Garret Christensen & Allan Dafoe & Edward Miguel & Don A Moore & Andrew K Rose, 2019. "A study of the impact of data sharing on article citations using journal policies as a natural experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick & Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2014. "Open access to data: An ideal professed but not practised," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1621-1633.
    7. Benedikt Fecher & Sascha Friesike & Marcel Hebing, 2014. "What Drives Academic Data Sharing?," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 655, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    8. Javier Martínez-Vega & David Rodríguez-Rodríguez, 2022. "Protected Area Effectiveness in the Scientific Literature: A Decade-Long Bibliometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Ho Fai Chan & Nikita Ferguson & David A. Savage & David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Is Science Able to Perform Under Pressure? Insights from COVID-19," CREMA Working Paper Series 2020-07, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    10. Mark J. McCabe & Frank Mueller-Langer, 2019. "Does Data Disclosure Increase Citations? Empirical Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Leading Economics Journals," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2019-02, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Claire M Mason & Paul J Box & Shanae M Burns, 2020. "Research data sharing in the Australian national science agency: Understanding the relative importance of organisational, disciplinary and domain-specific influences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Harper, Lindsey M. & Kim, Youngseek, 2018. "Attitudinal, normative, and resource factors affecting psychologists’ intentions to adopt an open data badge: An empirical analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 23-32.
    13. Andrea Sixto-Costoya & Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent & Rut Lucas-Domínguez & Antonio Vidal-Infer, 2020. "The Emergency Medicine Facing the Challenge of Open Science," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-7, March.
    14. Karin Hansson & Anna Dahlgren, 2022. "Open research data repositories: Practices, norms, and metadata for sharing images," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(2), pages 303-316, February.
    15. Kai Li & Jason Rollins & Erjia Yan, 2018. "Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: a selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 1-20, April.
    16. Giovanni Colavizza & Iain Hrynaszkiewicz & Isla Staden & Kirstie Whitaker & Barbara McGillivray, 2020. "The citation advantage of linking publications to research data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, April.
    17. Wesley Mendes-Da-Silva & Cristiana Cerqueira Leal, 2021. "Salami Science in the Age of Open Data: Déjà lu and Accountability in Management and Business Research," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 25(1), pages 200194-2001.
    18. Dominique G Roche & Loeske E B Kruuk & Robert Lanfear & Sandra A Binning, 2015. "Public Data Archiving in Ecology and Evolution: How Well Are We Doing?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-12, November.
    19. Keren Weinshall & Lee Epstein, 2020. "Developing High‐Quality Data Infrastructure for Legal Analytics: Introducing the Israeli Supreme Court Database," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 416-434, June.
    20. Bettina Suhr & Johanna Dungl & Alexander Stocker, 2020. "Search, reuse and sharing of research data in materials science and engineering—A qualitative interview study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-26, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0189288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.