IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0234172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When are researchers willing to share their data? – Impacts of values and uncertainty on open data in academia

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Stieglitz
  • Konstantin Wilms
  • Milad Mirbabaie
  • Lennart Hofeditz
  • Bela Brenger
  • Ania López
  • Stephanie Rehwald

Abstract

Background: E-science technologies have significantly increased the availability of data. Research grant providers such as the European Union increasingly require open access publishing of research results and data. However, despite its significance to research, the adoption rate of open data technology remains low across all disciplines, especially in Europe where research has primarily focused on technical solutions (such as Zenodo or the Open Science Framework) or considered only parts of the issue. Methods and findings: In this study, we emphasized the non-technical factors perceived value and uncertainty factors in the context of academia, which impact researchers’ acceptance of open data–the idea that researchers should not only publish their findings in the form of articles or reports, but also share the corresponding raw data sets. We present the results of a broad quantitative analysis including N = 995 researchers from 13 large to medium-sized universities in Germany. In order to test 11 hypotheses regarding researchers’ intentions to share their data, as well as detect any hierarchical or disciplinary differences, we employed a structured equation model (SEM) following the partial least squares (PLS) modeling approach. Conclusions: Grounded in the value-based theory, this article proclaims that most individuals in academia embrace open data when the perceived advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Furthermore, uncertainty factors impact the perceived value (consisting of the perceived advantages and disadvantages) of sharing research data. We found that researchers’ assumptions about effort required during the data preparation process were diminished by awareness of e-science technologies (such as Zenodo or the Open Science Framework), which also increased their tendency to perceive personal benefits via data exchange. Uncertainty factors seem to influence the intention to share data. Effects differ between disciplines and hierarchical levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Stieglitz & Konstantin Wilms & Milad Mirbabaie & Lennart Hofeditz & Bela Brenger & Ania López & Stephanie Rehwald, 2020. "When are researchers willing to share their data? – Impacts of values and uncertainty on open data in academia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234172
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234172
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234172&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heather A Piwowar, 2011. "Who Shares? Who Doesn't? Factors Associated with Openly Archiving Raw Research Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-13, July.
    2. Laure Perrier & Erik Blondal & A Patricia Ayala & Dylanne Dearborn & Tim Kenny & David Lightfoot & Roger Reka & Mindy Thuna & Leanne Trimble & Heather MacDonald, 2017. "Research data management in academic institutions: A scoping review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Ritu Agarwal & Vasant Dhar, 2014. "Editorial —Big Data, Data Science, and Analytics: The Opportunity and Challenge for IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 443-448, September.
    4. Carol Tenopir & Suzie Allard & Kimberly Douglass & Arsev Umur Aydinoglu & Lei Wu & Eleanor Read & Maribeth Manoff & Mike Frame, 2011. "Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and Perceptions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-21, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    7. A. Willem & M. Buelens, 2005. "Knowledge Sharing in Public Sector Organizations: The Effect of Organizational Characteristics on Interdepartmental Knowledge Sharing," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 05/344, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    8. Benedikt Fecher & Sascha Friesike & Marcel Hebing, 2015. "What Drives Academic Data Sharing?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-25, February.
    9. Caroline J Savage & Andrew J Vickers, 2009. "Empirical Study of Data Sharing by Authors Publishing in PLoS Journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(9), pages 1-3, September.
    10. Nicola Milia & Alessandra Congiu & Paolo Anagnostou & Francesco Montinaro & Marco Capocasa & Emanuele Sanna & Giovanni Destro Bisol, 2012. "Mine, Yours, Ours? Sharing Data on Human Genetic Variation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-8, June.
    11. Vicente-Saez, Ruben & Martinez-Fuentes, Clara, 2018. "Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 428-436.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:pone00:0234172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.