IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0239216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Search, reuse and sharing of research data in materials science and engineering—A qualitative interview study

Author

Listed:
  • Bettina Suhr
  • Johanna Dungl
  • Alexander Stocker

Abstract

Open research data practices are a relatively new, thus still evolving part of scientific work, and their usage varies strongly within different scientific domains. In the literature, the investigation of open research data practices covers the whole range of big empirical studies covering multiple scientific domains to smaller, in depth studies analysing a single field of research. Despite the richness of literature on this topic, there is still a lack of knowledge on the (open) research data awareness and practices in materials science and engineering. While most current studies focus only on some aspects of open research data practices, we aim for a comprehensive understanding of all practices with respect to the considered scientific domain. Hence this study aims at 1) drawing the whole picture of search, reuse and sharing of research data 2) while focusing on materials science and engineering. The chosen approach allows to explore the connections between different aspects of open research data practices, e.g. between data sharing and data search. In depth interviews with 13 researchers in this field were conducted, transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed using content analysis. The main findings characterised research data in materials science and engineering as extremely diverse, often generated for a very specific research focus and needing a precise description of the data and the complete generation process for possible reuse. Results on research data search and reuse showed that the interviewees intended to reuse data but were mostly unfamiliar with (yet interested in) modern methods as dataset search engines, data journals or searching public repositories. Current research data sharing is not open, but bilaterally and usually encouraged by supervisors or employers. Project funding does affect data sharing in two ways: some researchers argue to share their data openly due to their funding agency’s policy, while others face legal restrictions for sharing as their projects are partly funded by industry. The time needed for a precise description of the data and their generation process is named as biggest obstacle for data sharing. From these findings, a precise set of actions is derived suitable to support Open Data, involving training for researchers and introducing rewards for data sharing on the level of universities and funding bodies.

Suggested Citation

  • Bettina Suhr & Johanna Dungl & Alexander Stocker, 2020. "Search, reuse and sharing of research data in materials science and engineering—A qualitative interview study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-26, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239216
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239216
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239216&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0239216?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kathleen Gregory & Paul Groth & Helena Cousijn & Andrea Scharnhorst & Sally Wyatt, 2019. "Searching Data: A Review of Observational Data Retrieval Practices in Selected Disciplines," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(5), pages 419-432, May.
    2. Jessica L Couture & Rachael E Blake & Gavin McDonald & Colette L Ward, 2018. "A funder-imposed data publication requirement seldom inspired data sharing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Gianmaria Silvello, 2018. "Theory and practice of data citation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 6-20, January.
    4. Mengnan Zhao & Erjia Yan & Kai Li, 2018. "Data set mentions and citations: A content analysis of full†text publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 32-46, January.
    5. Renata Gonçalves Curty & Kevin Crowston & Alison Specht & Bruce W Grant & Elizabeth D Dalton, 2017. "Attitudes and norms affecting scientists’ data reuse," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Leonardo Candela & Donatella Castelli & Paolo Manghi & Alice Tani, 2015. "Data journals: A survey," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(9), pages 1747-1762, September.
    7. Carol Tenopir & Elizabeth D Dalton & Suzie Allard & Mike Frame & Ivanka Pjesivac & Ben Birch & Danielle Pollock & Kristina Dorsett, 2015. "Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    8. Youngseek Kim & Ayoung Yoon, 2017. "Scientists' data reuse behaviors: A multilevel analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2709-2719, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pablo Dorta-González & Sara M. González-Betancor & María Isabel Dorta-González, 2021. "To what extent is researchers' data-sharing motivated by formal mechanisms of recognition and credit?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2209-2225, March.
    2. Mike Thelwall, 2020. "Data in Brief: Can a mega-journal for data be useful?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 697-709, July.
    3. Claire M Mason & Paul J Box & Shanae M Burns, 2020. "Research data sharing in the Australian national science agency: Understanding the relative importance of organisational, disciplinary and domain-specific influences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Anneke Zuiderwijk & Rhythima Shinde & Wei Jeng, 2020. "What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-49, September.
    5. Xiaoguang Wang & Qingyu Duan & Mengli Liang, 2021. "Understanding the process of data reuse: An extensive review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(9), pages 1161-1182, September.
    6. Dosso, Dennis & Silvello, Gianmaria, 2020. "Data credit distribution: A new method to estimate databases impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    7. Mike Thelwall & Marcus Munafò & Amalia Mas-Bleda & Emma Stuart & Meiko Makita & Verena Weigert & Chris Keene & Nushrat Khan & Katie Drax & Kayvan Kousha, 2020. "Is useful research data usually shared? An investigation of genome-wide association study summary statistics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-11, February.
    8. Elizabeth Martín-Mora & Shari Ellis & Lawrence M Page, 2020. "Use of web-based species occurrence information systems by academics and government professionals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-41, July.
    9. Carol Tenopir & Natalie M Rice & Suzie Allard & Lynn Baird & Josh Borycz & Lisa Christian & Bruce Grant & Robert Olendorf & Robert J Sandusky, 2020. "Data sharing, management, use, and reuse: Practices and perceptions of scientists worldwide," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, March.
    10. Libby Hemphill & Amy Pienta & Sara Lafia & Dharma Akmon & David A. Bleckley, 2022. "How do properties of data, their curation, and their funding relate to reuse?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(10), pages 1432-1444, October.
    11. Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez & Flavio Hourneaux Junior & Marcelo Luiz Dias da Silva Gabriel & Luis Enrique Valdez-Juárez, 2021. "On Earth as It Is in Heaven: Proxy Measurements to Assess Sustainable Development Goals at the Company Level through CSR Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick, 2018. "Open access to research data: Strategic delay and the ambiguous welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 20-34.
    13. Troy J. Bouffard & Ekaterina Uryupova & Klaus Dodds & Vladimir E. Romanovsky & Alec P. Bennett & Dmitry Streletskiy, 2021. "Scientific Cooperation: Supporting Circumpolar Permafrost Monitoring and Data Sharing," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Mike Thelwall, 2021. "Alternative medicines worth researching? Citation analyses of acupuncture, chiropractic, homeopathy, and osteopathy 1996–2017," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8731-8747, October.
    15. Ho Fai Chan & Nikita Ferguson & David A. Savage & David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Is Science Able to Perform Under Pressure? Insights from COVID-19," CREMA Working Paper Series 2020-07, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    16. Mandy Wigdorowitz & Marton Ribary & Andrea Farina & Eleonora Lima & Daniele Borkowski & Paola Marongiu & Amanda H. Sorensen & Christelle Timis & Barbara McGillivray, 2024. "It Takes a Village! Editorship, Advocacy, and Research in Running an Open Access Data Journal," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-10, August.
    17. Wesley Mendes-Da-Silva, 2018. "The Promotion of Transparency and the Impact of Research on Business," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 22(4), pages 639-649.
    18. Andrea Sixto-Costoya & Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent & Rut Lucas-Domínguez & Antonio Vidal-Infer, 2020. "The Emergency Medicine Facing the Challenge of Open Science," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-7, March.
    19. Indra Budi & Yaniasih Yaniasih, 2023. "Understanding the meanings of citations using sentiment, role, and citation function classifications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 735-759, January.
    20. Xuelian Pan & Erjia Yan & Weina Hua, 2016. "Disciplinary differences of software use and impact in scientific literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1593-1610, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239216. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.