开放数据实践的领域特殊性

Theresa Velden, Anastasiia Tcypina
{"title":"开放数据实践的领域特殊性","authors":"Theresa Velden, Anastasiia Tcypina","doi":"10.55835/64b14ef741aa5b443685f9d3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. However, scientific fields differ in their research practices and norms for publicly sharing research data. We provide quantitative evidence of differences in data practices and the public sharing of research data at a granularity of field-specificity that is rarely reported in open data surveys. Based on a survey of 8,822 researchers at German Universities, we find considerable variation, within and between disciplines, of data practices and rates of open data sharing. For experimentally oriented subject areas we further observe a relationship between data self-sufficiency and public data sharing which likely reflects a link between data sharing and the epistemic specificity of data. Our findings underline that in order to quantitatively assess and evaluate rates of public data sharing, a better understanding of the embedding of public data sharing into field-specific research practices is needed.","PeriodicalId":334841,"journal":{"name":"27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023)","volume":"37 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices\",\"authors\":\"Theresa Velden, Anastasiia Tcypina\",\"doi\":\"10.55835/64b14ef741aa5b443685f9d3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. However, scientific fields differ in their research practices and norms for publicly sharing research data. We provide quantitative evidence of differences in data practices and the public sharing of research data at a granularity of field-specificity that is rarely reported in open data surveys. Based on a survey of 8,822 researchers at German Universities, we find considerable variation, within and between disciplines, of data practices and rates of open data sharing. For experimentally oriented subject areas we further observe a relationship between data self-sufficiency and public data sharing which likely reflects a link between data sharing and the epistemic specificity of data. Our findings underline that in order to quantitatively assess and evaluate rates of public data sharing, a better understanding of the embedding of public data sharing into field-specific research practices is needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":334841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023)\",\"volume\":\"37 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55835/64b14ef741aa5b443685f9d3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55835/64b14ef741aa5b443685f9d3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的研究人员被要求公开他们的研究数据。然而,各科学领域的研究实践和公开共享研究数据的规范各不相同。我们提供了数据实践和研究数据公开共享方面的差异的量化证据,这些差异是开放数据调查中很少报道的具体领域的差异。基于对德国大学 8822 名研究人员的调查,我们发现在学科内部和学科之间,数据实践和开放数据共享率存在相当大的差异。对于以实验为导向的学科领域,我们进一步观察到数据自给自足与公共数据共享之间的关系,这可能反映了数据共享与数据的认识论特性之间的联系。我们的研究结果强调,为了定量评估和评价公共数据的共享率,需要更好地了解公共数据的共享在特定领域研究实践中的嵌入情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Field-Specificity of Open Data Practices
Increasingly, researchers are expected to make their research data openly available. However, scientific fields differ in their research practices and norms for publicly sharing research data. We provide quantitative evidence of differences in data practices and the public sharing of research data at a granularity of field-specificity that is rarely reported in open data surveys. Based on a survey of 8,822 researchers at German Universities, we find considerable variation, within and between disciplines, of data practices and rates of open data sharing. For experimentally oriented subject areas we further observe a relationship between data self-sufficiency and public data sharing which likely reflects a link between data sharing and the epistemic specificity of data. Our findings underline that in order to quantitatively assess and evaluate rates of public data sharing, a better understanding of the embedding of public data sharing into field-specific research practices is needed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信