Using participatory design and visual narrative inquiry to investigate researchers’ data challenges and recommendations for library research data services

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report on an information gathering study on users’ research data-related challenges and proposals for library research data services (RDS). This study probes how early career researchers visually conceptualize the research process in their disciplines, their self-reported research data challenges, and their recommendations for library RDS. Design/methodology/approach – Two focus group sessions were undertaken with a total of eight early career researchers. Adopting the visual narrative inquiry method, the participants were asked to sketch the general research process in their domain. The individuals’ illustrations of the research process were then used as the basis for reflecting on their data-related needs and potential RDS that would assist them during the research process. Findings – Participants presented a research process that was more personal and, in most cases, more imperfect than the research lifecycle models that academic libraries are increasingly using for RDS development and communication. The authors present their data-related challenges, which included data access barriers, low knowledge of best practices for research data management, the need for a deeper understanding of post-publication impact, and inconsistent awareness of existing library and institution RDS. The authors outline RDS recommendations that participants proposed, which included a web-based tools, customized training sessions, and “distilled” guides to research data best practices. Practical implications – The study flagged users’ gaps in understandings of existing library and institutional RDS, suggesting that there may be an opportunity to engage users in the design of communications plans for services. The findings from this user study will inform the development of RDS at the institution. Originality/value – This paper puts forth a methodological approach that academic libraries can adapt for understanding users’ needs and user-generated design solutions.

A critical analysis of lifecycle models of the research process and research data management

“…Stages may run in parallel or could be skipped entirely (Pepe et al, 2010). A researcher may hit a problem and have to repeat steps early in the cycle (Mattern et al, 2015) or plan the research as highly iterative. Furthermore, at some point repeating the same method that has been used before has to break down and a new paradigm be constructed.…”

Toward a conceptual framework for data sharing practices in social sciences: A profile approach

“…In addition to disciplinary norms, we would like to capture valued research skills (RC3) and research activities (RC4), inspired by Mattern et al ()'s study. Mattern et al gathered information about how social scientists visualized their research patterns, and found that social scientists do not follow the similar research process.…”

The CENDARI Infrastructure

“…We note that the workflow described above is non-linear as reported in other studies (e.g. [Mattern et al 2015]). Researchers can at any stage acquire new information, reorganise their data, refine their hypotheses or even plan new archive or library visits.…”

“…The plan, then, was to provide good resources for users, tell them what to do and wait for them to adopt digital humanities methods". Digital humanities has since then changed perceptions and we can now see a number of projects adopting participatory design to learn about users and their requirements [Mattern et al 2015;Wessels et al 2015;Visconti 2016].…”