Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021 2021
DOI: 10.1145/3442442.3451367
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rewarding Research Data Management

Abstract: In the context of open science, good research data management (RDM), including data sharing and data reuse, has become a major goal of research policy. However, studies and monitors reveal that open science practices are not yet widely mainstream. Rewards and incentives have been suggested as a solution, to facilitate and accelerate the development of open and transparent RDM. Based on relevant literature, our paper provides a critical analysis of three main issues: what should be rewarded and incentivized, wh… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the one hand, we see advocacy and research policy efforts 219 repeatedly trying to reform the current system, which is dominated by publisher prestige, to, instead, reward scholars for all activities and content types involved in research processes, not only for publications in the traditional, print legacy sense. These attempts have given rise to initiatives such as the Open Science Career Assessment Matrix (OS-CAM 220 , but, as pointed out by (Schöpfel and Azeroual 2021), such attempts do not cover the detailed and domain-specific guidance which could make them truly operational -for instance, exactly which people and which data-sharing behaviours should be rewarded (academics in the strict sense, or including research support personnel) -nor do they address anomalies such as the potential distortion of research interests in easily accessible and shareable data sources (Edmond 2015) as an entailment of data sharing mandates. Yet, the biggest problem is that although we see investment in data management and sharing increasingly become a condition of external research grant funding, they largely remain invisible when it comes to academic institutional hiring, tenure, and promotion criteria.…”
Section: Incentives (Or the Lack Thereof) To Publish Research Data As...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the one hand, we see advocacy and research policy efforts 219 repeatedly trying to reform the current system, which is dominated by publisher prestige, to, instead, reward scholars for all activities and content types involved in research processes, not only for publications in the traditional, print legacy sense. These attempts have given rise to initiatives such as the Open Science Career Assessment Matrix (OS-CAM 220 , but, as pointed out by (Schöpfel and Azeroual 2021), such attempts do not cover the detailed and domain-specific guidance which could make them truly operational -for instance, exactly which people and which data-sharing behaviours should be rewarded (academics in the strict sense, or including research support personnel) -nor do they address anomalies such as the potential distortion of research interests in easily accessible and shareable data sources (Edmond 2015) as an entailment of data sharing mandates. Yet, the biggest problem is that although we see investment in data management and sharing increasingly become a condition of external research grant funding, they largely remain invisible when it comes to academic institutional hiring, tenure, and promotion criteria.…”
Section: Incentives (Or the Lack Thereof) To Publish Research Data As...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Under this educational context, it has been documented that OS and effective RDM have become a priority for organisations globally [7], since funding agencies and publishers now require scientists to share their data effectively. On the one hand, as it is widely recognised that OS comprises several interdisciplinary dimensions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%