Trustworthy or not? Research data on COVID-19 in data repositories

Azeroual, Otmane; Schöpfel, Joachim

doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-88493-8.00027-6

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, we might expect younger versus older people to face different challenges due to COVID‐19 and thus react differently (Settersten et al, 2020). This type of demographic focus has been particularly common during the current pandemic (e.g., Wolf et al, 2022), when the drive to publish information quickly has led to simpler, perhaps less reliable research output (Azeroual & Schöpfel, 2021). However, a demographic‐only focus also may miss key consumer differences associated with specific patterns of change.…”

Section: Consumer Segmentation In a Pandemicmentioning

confidence: 99%

A dynamic segmentation of U.S. women during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Ackerman

Borinstein

Kaji

et al. 2023

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a vast, but uneven, influence on consumers. Diversity in consumer reactions, and the extent to which those reactions lead to lasting preference and lifestyle changes, present challenges for implementing effective marketing strategies during a period of societal crisis. To address this, we conducted a dynamic segmentation analysis involving over 14,000 U.S. women by assessing relevant psychological, experiential, and other personal factors at multiple time points during the pandemic. This analysis identified seven unique consumer segments who varied in their current and future degree of change, and who indicated responsiveness to specific forms of brand and advertising content. This seven-segment clustering was highly stable over time, suggesting that certain segmentation approaches hold continuing value for marketers even as widespread events like pandemics evolve.

show abstract

Section: Consumer Segmentation In a Pandemicmentioning

confidence: 99%

A dynamic segmentation of U.S. women during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Ackerman

Borinstein

Kaji

et al. 2023

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of the scientific papers on COVID‐19 are open access (Arrizabalaga et al, 2020 ; Belli et al, 2020 ) but “the real number of COVID‐19 datasets is hard to estimate […] and much data are not available on data repository because the research is still in progress or because of legal, industrial, or other reasons” (Azeroual & Schöpfel, 2021 ). In this study, we investigate how many of these datasets about coronavirus are really available, particularly those shared with COVID‐19 publications developed in Spanish institutions and, of course, if these datasets are open and FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) (Wilkinson et al, 2016 ) and the depository platforms or repositories follow TRUST principles (Transparency, Responsibility, User focus, Sustainability and Technology) (Corrado, 2019 ; Lin et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID‐19: A first approach

Cerda‐Cosme

Méndez

2022

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the coronavirus pandemic, changes in the way science is done and shared occurred, which motivates meta-research to help understand science communication in crises and improve its effectiveness. The objective is to study how many Spanish scientific papers on COVID-19 published during 2020 share their research data. Qualitative and descriptive study applying nine attributes: (a) availability, (b) accessibility, (c) format, (d) licensing, (e) linkage, (f) funding, (g) editorial policy, (h) content, and (i) statistics. We analyzed 1,340 papers, 1,173 (87.5%) did not have research data. A total of 12.5% share their research data of which 2.1% share their data in repositories, 5% share their data through a simple request, 0.2% do not have permission to share their data, and 5.2% share their data as supplementary material. There is a small percentage that shares their research data; however, it demonstrates the researchers' poor knowledge on how to properly share their research data and their lack of knowledge on what is research data.

show abstract