Data sharing in biological anthropology

Abstract

Open data sharing democratizes science by making data more equitably available throughout the world. Furthermore, open data sharing improves the reproducibility and quality of research and enables new collaborations powered by the freely available data. Open data are defined as data that can be freely used, reused, and redistributed by anyone. For an interdisciplinary field like biological anthropology, data sharing is critical since one person cannot easily collect data across the domains relevant to our field. The goal of this paper is to encourage broader data sharing in our discipline by exploring the state of data sharing in the field of biological anthropology. Our paper is divided into four parts: the first section describes the benefits, challenges, and emerging solutions to open data sharing; the second section presents the results of our data archiving and sharing survey that was completed by over 700 researchers; the third section presents personal experiences of data sharing by the authors; and the fourth section discusses the strengths of different types of data repositories and provides a list of recommended data repositories.

Specimens as individuals: Four interventions and recommendations for great ape skeletal collections research and curation

“…158 Data repatriation or data sharing is a useful step to confront the colonial legacy of unequal distribution of in-country versus outof-country natural history collections of local specimens. 166,177 Digital repatriation could increase access in countries of origin. 153 There is a need for reliable open-access archives of specimen images and multidimensional data with contributions from the researchers who use them.…”

Minimally invasive biomarkers in human and non‐human primate evolutionary biology: Tools for understanding variation and adaptation

“…There is likely no more effective or efficient way to advance the use of MIBs in HEB than to adopt standardized approaches for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data (Mulligan et al, in press ; Poisot et al, 2019 ). Research groups should freely share and, ideally, publish detailed protocols for data collection and analysis.…”

Integrating genealogy and dental variation: contributions to biological anthropology

“…However, sensitive demographic and phenotypic information may require special care (McDade, 2020). This necessarily limits—or at least complicates—data sharing initiatives and the ways in which researchers can collaborate with other scholars, study participants, and broader stakeholders (Greely, 2001; Mulligan et al, 2022).…”

“…While collecting dental molds, casts, and anthropometrics on living individuals necessarily involves participant permission, long‐term use of those resources is not always approved on a study‐by‐study basis. Further, it is difficult to fully appreciate the dynamics of past researcher‐participant relationships, including socio‐ or geopolitical power dynamics, informed consent, and the existence/application of research ethics standards; this is especially a concern for samples representing marginalized, indigenous, or vulnerable communities and their descendants (Blakey, 2021; Mulligan et al, 2022; Tsosie et al, 2021; Turner et al, 2018; Wagner et al, 2020). While outreach and collaboration with stakeholders may mark a fruitful next step in genealogical research, the question remains of who should speak for past study participants in order to prioritize community data sovereignties (Tsosie et al, 2021).…”