IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v7y2017i3p2158244017717301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying the Complex Position of Research Data and Data Sharing Among Researchers in Natural Science

Author

Listed:
  • Keiko Kurata
  • Mamiko Matsubayashi
  • Shinji Mine

Abstract

This article aims to provide an overview of researchers’ practices and perceptions on data use and sharing. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 23 Japanese researchers in the natural sciences to identify their research practices and data use, including data sharing. We divided the interview scripts into meaningful phrases as a unit of analysis. Next, we focused on 406 statements on research data and reanalyzed them based on four aspects: stance on research data, practices and perceptions of data use, range of data sharing, and data type. A cluster analysis identified 14 clusters, which were divided into five groups: open access for data, restricted access for data, data interpretation, data processing and preservation, and data infrastructure. Our results reveal the complexity and diversity of the relationship between data and research practices. That is, the practice of research data sharing is heterogeneous, with no “one size fits all†between and among researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Keiko Kurata & Mamiko Matsubayashi & Shinji Mine, 2017. "Identifying the Complex Position of Research Data and Data Sharing Among Researchers in Natural Science," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(3), pages 21582440177, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:3:p:2158244017717301
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244017717301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244017717301
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244017717301?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. Jelte M Wicherts & Marjan Bakker & Dylan Molenaar, 2011. "Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-7, November.
    2. Christine L. Borgman, 2012. "The conundrum of sharing research data," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(6), pages 1059-1078, June.
    3. Christine L. Borgman, 2012. "The conundrum of sharing research data," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(6), pages 1059-1078, June.
    4. Kealey, Terence & Ricketts, Martin, 2014. "Modelling science as a contribution good," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1014-1024.
    5. Youngseek Kim & Jeffrey M. Stanton, 2016. "Institutional and individual factors affecting scientists' data-sharing behaviors: A multilevel analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(4), pages 776-799, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Tim Davies & Duncan Edwards, 2012. "Emerging Implications of Open and Linked Data for Knowledge Sharing in Development," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 117-127, September.
    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. Bryn Nelson, 2009. "Data sharing: Empty archives," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7261), pages 160-163, September.
    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. Fatma Sonmez Cakir & Zafer Adiguzel, 2020. "Analysis of Leader Effectiveness in Organization and Knowledge Sharing Behavior on Employees and Organization," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440209, March.
    2. 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.

    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. Youngseek Kim & Ayoung Yoon, 2017. "Scientists' data reuse behaviors: A multilevel analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2709-2719, December.
    2. Ryan P Womack, 2015. "Research Data in Core Journals in Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    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. Shibayama, Sotaro & Lawson, Cornelia, 2021. "The use of rewards in the sharing of research resources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    5. 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.
    6. Joshua Borycz & Robert Olendorf & Alison Specht & Bruce Grant & Kevin Crowston & Carol Tenopir & Suzie Allard & Natalie M. Rice & Rachael Hu & Robert J. Sandusky, 2023. "Perceived benefits of open data are improving but scientists still lack resources, skills, and rewards," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Sixto-Costoya Andrea & Robinson-Garcia Nicolas & Leeuwen Thed & Costas Rodrigo, 2021. "Exploring the relevance of ORCID as a source of study of data sharing activities at the individual-level: a methodological discussion," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 7149-7165, August.
    9. Vikas Jaiman & Leonard Pernice & Visara Urovi, 2022. "User incentives for blockchain-based data sharing platforms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-22, April.
    10. 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).
    11. Mike Thelwall, 2020. "Data in Brief: Can a mega-journal for data be useful?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 697-709, July.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Andrea K. Thomer, 2022. "Integrative data reuse at scientifically significant sites: Case studies at Yellowstone National Park and the La Brea Tar Pits," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(8), pages 1155-1170, August.
    15. Koenraad De Smedt & Dimitris Koureas & Peter Wittenburg, 2020. "FAIR Digital Objects for Science: From Data Pieces to Actionable Knowledge Units," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Plantin, Jean-Christophe, 2021. "The data archive as factory: alienation and resistance of data processors," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 109692, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Jenny Bossaller & Anthony J. Million, 2023. "The research data life cycle, legacy data, and dilemmas in research data management," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(6), pages 701-706, June.
    20. Guillaume Cabanac & Thomas Preuss, 2013. "Capitalizing on order effects in the bids of peer-reviewed conferences to secure reviews by expert referees," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 405-415, February.

    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:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:3:p:2158244017717301. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.