Data Practices of Agricultural Scientists: Results from an Exploratory Study

Diekmann, Florian

doi:10.1080/10496505.2012.636005

Cited by 28 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While this study evaluates aspects of data sharing, such as rates, disciplinary differences, and methods, other factors that may influence an individual researcher's decision to share data, or not share, cannot be discerned by reviewing published articles. Many of the survey and interview studies are better able to probe questions about motivations and perceptions among researchers and disciplines (Akers & Doty, 2013;Campbell & Bendavid, 2002;Cragin, Palmer, Carlson, & Witt, 2010;Diekmann, 2012;Kuipers & van der Hoeven, 2009;Swan & Brown, 2008;Tenopir et al, 2011;Williams, 2013). This study of natural resources, ecology, evolution and behavior scientists does, however, shed some light on these disciplinary cultures-there are some obvious norms and expectations widely shared among the broader community of researchers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There may be privacy concerns about data, particularly when human subjects are involved. Several studies have surfaced these reasons, and others, explaining why scientists choose not to share their data (Campbell & Bendavid, 2002;Cragin et al, 2010;Diekmann, 2012;Piwowar, 2011;Reichman et al, 2011;Savage & Vickers, 2009;Swan & Brown, 2008;Tenopir et al, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tenopir et al's (2011) large survey study investigated data sharing practices across several broad science categories, including environmental sciences and ecology, and found significant differences among both data sharing practices and attitudes about data sharing. Diekmann (2012) interviewed agricultural researchers at Ohio State University about their data practices, a sample that included natural resources management and environmental scientists. He found general openness to the idea of sharing, but few researchers had actual experience sharing their data, and they cited a range of concerns about secondary use.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Data Sharing Among Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources Scientists: An Analysis of Selected Publications

Herold

2015

Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONUnderstanding the differing data management practices among academic disciplines is an important way to inform existing and emerging library research support and services. This paper reports findings from a study of data sharing practices among ecology, evolution, and natural resources scientists at the University of Minnesota. It examines data sharing rates, methods, and disciplinary differences and discusses the characteristics of researchers, data, methods, and aspects of data sharing across this group of disciplines. METHODS Data sharing practices are investigated by reviewing the two most recently published research articles (n=155) for each faculty member (n=78) in three departments at a single large research university. All mentions of data sharing in each publication were pursued in order to locate, analyze, and characterize shared data. RESULTS Seventy-two of 155 (46%) articles indicated that related research data was publicly shared by some method. The most prevalent method for data sharing was via journal websites, with 91% of data sharing articles using this method. Ecology, evolution, and behavior scientists shared data at the highest rate (70% of their articles), contrasting with fisheries, wildlife, and conservation biologists (18%), and forest resources (16%). DISCUSSION Differences between data sharing practices may be attributable to a range of influences: funder, journal, and institutional policies; disciplinary norms; and perceived or real rewards or incentives, as well as contrasting concerns, cost, or other barriers to sharing data. CONCLUSION Study results suggest differential approaches to data services outreach based on discipline and research type and support the need for education and influence on both scientist and journal practices. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE1. Data associated with published research articles was shared in almost half (46%) of the instances studied, indicating authors' willingness to share and opportunity for data-related education or influence.2. The prevalent method for sharing data among ecology, evolution, and natural resources scientists is through journal websites (91%), often not adhering to preservation best practices; this method poses an open question about persistence.3. There are important differences in data sharing rates related to research type, making disciplinary generalizations difficult, but those about research methods/types more useful.4. Despite overlap between the types of science, there are data sharing practice differences between natural resources, and ecology and evolution scientists that suggest librarians take differential approaches to service and outreach to these disciplines.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Data Sharing Among Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources Scientists: An Analysis of Selected Publications

Herold

2015

Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous case studies have been published which report on surveys conducted among the researchers who generate the data to establish the fate of research data. [13][14][15] In each case the findings were similar: lack of institutional support for research data management, lack of suitable data repositories to archive data for the long term and no incentives or mandates in place to encourage systematic data archiving, resulting in researchers keeping their data within the research unit.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Archiving South African digital research data: How ready are we?

Koopman¹,

Jager²

2016

S. Afr. J. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital data archiving and research data management have become increasingly important for institutions in South Africa, particularly after the announcement by the National Research Foundation, one of the principal South African academic research funders, recommending these actions for the research that they fund. A case study undertaken during the latter half of 2014, among the biological sciences researchers at a South African university, explored the state of data management and archiving at this institution and the readiness of researchers to engage with sharing their digital research data through repositories. It was found that while some researchers were already engaged with digital data archiving in repositories, neither researchers nor the university had implemented systematic research data management.

show abstract

“…While researching data service needs at the University of Oregon, Westra (2010) found that interviews provided necessary context that would be missing from online surveys. Diekmann (2012) reports that the "semi-structured interviews" he conducted with scientists at the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center "document the broad challenges and obstacles associated with managing agricultural research data and provide guidance for the development of more researcher-focused approaches" (p. 30). Librarians at Colorado State University found that their "focus group protocol…exceeded (their) expectations" (McLure, Level, Cranston, Oelherts, & Culbertson, 2014, p. 156) in identifying researchers' perceived needs.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Data Management Among Life Sciences Faculty: Implications for Library Service

Johnson¹,

Steeves²

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pending peer review and publication. Following the 2013 release of the Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research memorandum, research data management (RDM) has been the target of increased interest and development among both researchers and librarians. Widespread evidence of significant variability in practices and attitudes indicates that librarians should evaluate their specific patron base as they approach service development. The authors issued a survey to estimate actual and perceived research data management needs of NYU's life sciences faculty in order to understand how the library could best contribute to the research lifecycle.

show abstract

Data Practices of Agricultural Scientists: Results from an Exploratory Study

Cited by 28 publications

References 26 publications

Data Sharing Among Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources Scientists: An Analysis of Selected Publications

Data Sharing Among Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources Scientists: An Analysis of Selected Publications

Archiving South African digital research data: How ready are we?

Research Data Management Among Life Sciences Faculty: Implications for Library Service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About