Three Gaps in Opening Science

Mosconi, Gaia; Li, Qinyu; Randall, Dave; Karasti, Helena; Tolmie, Peter; Barutzky, Jana; Korn, Matthias; Pipek, Volkmar

doi:10.1007/s10606-019-09354-z

Cited by 22 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, researchers wishing to prepare qualitative data to be stored and shared in a repository will require time to anonymise the dataset and prepare a metadata information file describing the contents of the dataset so that it is discoverable by other researchers. Furthermore, the incentive structure of academic publishing does not widely support researchers in allocating time and resources to producing datasets and metadata to be shared with others (Mosconi et al 2019), although supporting and incentivising such activities can increase researchers' engagement in open science practices (Ali-Khan, Harris, and Gold 2017). A considerable amount of time may also be required of participants after their initial engagement in the research project to review their data prior to storing it in a repository, to ensure that they are comfortable with the information that is included in the data to be stored and shared with other researchers.…”

Section: Cost Time and Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research

Tamminen

Bundon

Smith

et al. 2021

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is currently little guidance that exists for researchers in the sport and exercise sciences on open qualitative research practices. The purpose of paper is to provide researchers with guidance regarding the considerations necessary for making informed decisions about engaging in open research practices within qualitative inquiry. The guidance was developed through a series of four working group meetings with experts in qualitative research and meetings with key stakeholders (study participants, journal editors, and data management experts). The wider open qualitative research literature also informed the guidance. Nine core values were first identified as underpinning the considerations for engaging in open qualitative research practices: Choice (academic freedom and participant autonomy); Plurality not replication; Flexibility and emergent design; Transparency; Relational ethics; Quality; Education; Equity; and Responsibility. Considerations for researchers are then provided in the following areas as they pertain to open science practices in qualitative inquiry: Types of Data; Types of Studies; Participant Groups; Anonymity and Confidentiality; Participant Consent; Storage and Stewardship of Qualitative Data; Knowledge Dissemination and Open Access Publications; Cost, Time, and Resources; and Preregistration of Qualitative Studies. This paper provides an initial framework for identifying considerations for engaging in open qualitative research practices. These considerations will help qualitative researchers make informed decisions about and plan for implementation of open science practices, as well as assessing the risks and benefits of open science practices in qualitative inquiry.

show abstract

Section: Cost Time and Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research

Tamminen

Bundon

Smith

et al. 2021

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The result presented by [Furtado 2018] suggests that the management of scientific data should be approached broadly, considering different stages. One of these stages is data preservation, which involves data storage [Mosconi et al 2019]. Reliable repositories should be selected for data storage, considering data can be preserved for a long period, or even indefinitely.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Open Data Repositories

Costa¹,

Cordeiro²,

OliveiraJr³

2021

Anais Da v Escola Regional De Engenharia De Software (ERES 2021)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Data is one of the main concepts of Open Science, which has the purpose to make scientific research artifacts accessible for everyone. Open data provides recommendations and practices to get access and use data from scientific researches, in a free, permanent, citable, auditable and interchangeable way. To facilitate the data management, it is important to store them in a repository. Considering this context, this paper provides a comparison among five known open data repositories. We performed the comparison taking into account a set of criteria, such as, data format constraints, digital identifier, versioning of published datasets, curators of data collections, metadata schema, versioning and exportation, storage limit, paid services, redundancy and preservation, access controls and APIs. We present results and discussions, in terms of such criteria.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the YouTube API V3 was released by Google in 2014, as part of the Google developer project. It allows developers to access video statistics and YouTube channels' data (note that the API also allows users to manipulate videos and channel programmatically) (Mosconi et al, 2019).…”

Section: Youtube Crawlermentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal data protection and academia: GDPR issues and multi-modal data-collections "in the wild"

Siegert

Silber-Varod

Carmi

et al. 2020

OJAKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) has a direct impact on research activities, as it raises the awareness of personal rights not only among the scientists but also among the data-subjects scientists process information from. This paper presents the dilemma related to the privacy of audio and video data, compliance with the EU GDPR, and techniques to anonymize and pseudonymize such data. We further discuss issues of “in the wild” personal data collection by focusing on multi-modal collections, mainly of audio, video via these channels. Throughout this paper we define relevant core issues and highlight two challenges of “in the wild” data collection: Internet crawling and public data collecting. In the last section, some exemplary use cases are demonstrating the raised issues, illuminating how GDPR affects the collection of publicly available data; how privacy concerns influence participant behavior, and which de-anonymization levels can be reached with what kind of data. The key point we present is that the identity of the participants is revealed in the voice or video signal, while the latter is at the same time the object of the research. One implication is that the research community has to actively disconnect the data from the personal information on the participants. Hence the importance of a process of anonymity or omission of data for research activity. This entail the development of an infrastructure for data access control to enable data sharing among researchers

show abstract

Three Gaps in Opening Science

Cited by 22 publications

References 46 publications

Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research

Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research

Comparing Open Data Repositories

Personal data protection and academia: GDPR issues and multi-modal data-collections "in the wild"

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About