Academic librarians are increasingly engaging in data curation by providing infrastructure (e.g., institutional repositories) and offering services (e.g., data management plan consultations) to support the management of research data on their campuses. Efforts to develop these resources may benefit from a greater understanding of disciplinary differences in research data management needs. After conducting a survey of data management practices and perspectives at our research university, we categorized faculty members into four research domains—arts and humanities, social sciences, medical sciences, and basic sciences—and analyzed variations in their patterns of survey responses. We found statistically significant differences among the four research domains for nearly every survey item, revealing important disciplinary distinctions in data management actions, attitudes, and interest in support services. Serious consideration of both the similarities and dissimilarities among disciplines will help guide academic librarians and other data curation professionals in developing a range of data-management services that can be tailored to the unique needs of different scholarly researchers.

/pdf/disciplinary-differences-in-faculty-research-data-management-37yggjkt3r.pdf

Disciplinary Differences in Faculty Research Data Management Practices and Perspectives

PREFACE The growth in the capacity of the research community to collect and distribute data presents huge opportunities. It is already transforming old methods of scientific research and permitting the creation of new ones. However, the exploitation of these opportunities depends upon more than computing power, storage, and network connectivity. Among the promises of our growing universe of online digital data are the ability to integrate data into new forms of scholarly publishing to allow peer-examination and review of conclusions or analysis of experimental and observational data and the ability for subsequent researchers to make new analyses of the same data, including their combination with other data sets and uses that may have been unanticipated by the original producer or collector. The use of published digital data, like the use of digitally published literature, depends upon the ability to identify, authenticate, locate, access, and interpret them. Data citations provide necessary support for these functions, as well as other functions such as attribution of credit and establishment of provenance. References to data, however, present challenges not encountered in references to literature. For example, how can one specify a particular subset of data in the absence of familiar conventions such as page numbers or chapters? The traditions and good practices for maintaining the scholarly record by proper references to a work are well established and understood in regard to journal articles and other literature, but attributing credit by bibliographic references to data are not yet so broadly implemented. Recognizing the needs for better data referencing and citation practices and investing effort to address those needs has come at different rates in different fields and disciplines. As competing conventions and practices emerge in separate communities, inconsistencies and incompatibilities can interfere with promoting the sharing and use of research data. In order to reconcile this problem, sharing experiences across communities may be necessary, or at least helpful, to achieving the full potential of published data. Practical and consistent data citation standards and practices are thus important for providing the incentives, recognition, and rewards that foster scientific progress. New requirements from funding agencies to develop data management plans emphasize the need to develop standards and data citation practices. Together with representatives from several other organizations, the CODATA-ICSTI Task Group examines a number of key issues related to data identification, attribution, citation, and linking. Additionally, the Task Group helps coordinate international activities in this area and …

OUT OF CITE, OUT OF MIND: THE CURRENT STATE OF PRACTICE, POLICY, AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE CITATION OF DATA CODATA-ICSTI Task Group on Data Citation Standards and Practices

It has become increasingly accepted that important digital data must be retained and shared in order to preserve and promote knowledge, advance research in and across all disciplines of scholarly endeavor, and maximize the return on investment of public funds. To meet this challenge, colleges and universities are adding data services to existing infrastructures by drawing on the expertise of information professionals who are already involved in the acquisition, management and preservation of data in their daily jobs. Data services include planning and implementing good data management practices, thereby increasing researchers' ability to compete for grant funding and ensuring that data collections with continuing value are preserved for reuse. This volume provides a framework to guide information professionals in academic libraries, presses, and data centers through the process of managing research data from the planning stages through the life of a grant project and beyond. It illustrates principles of good practice with use-case examples and illuminates promising data service models through case studies of innovative, successful projects and collaborations. Contributors include: James L. Mullins, Purdue University; MacKenzie Smith, University of California at Davis; Sherry Lake, University of Virginia; John Kunze, University of California; Bernard Reilly, Center for Research Libraries; Jacob Carlson, Purdue University; Melissa Levine, University of Michigan; Jenn Riley, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Jan Brase, German National Library of Science and Technology; Seamus Ross, University of Toronto; Sarah Shreeves, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Jared Lyle, University of Michigan; Michele Kimpton, DuraSpace; Brian Schottlaender, University of California San Diego; Suzie Allard, University of Tennessee; Angus Whyte, Digital Curation Centre; Scott Brandt, Purdue University; Brian Westra, University of Oregon; Geneva Henry, Rice University; Gail Steinhart, Cornell University; and Cliff Lynch, Coalition for Networked Information. Charleston Insights in Library, Information, and Archival Sciences is a new series produced as a collaboration between the organizers of the Charleston Library Conference and Purdue University Press. Volumes in the series focus on important topics in library and information science, presenting the issues in a relatively jargon-free way that is accessible to all types of information professionals.

Research Data Management: Practical Strategies for Information Professionals

The growth of electronic publishing of literature has created new challenges, such as the need for mechanisms for citing online references in ways that can assure discoverability and retrieval for many years into the future. The growth in online datasets presents related, yet more complex challenges. It depends upon the ability to reliably identify, locate, access, interpret, and verify the version, integrity, and provenance of digital datasets. Data citation standards and good practices can form the basis for increased incentives, recognition, and rewards for scientific data activities that in many cases are currently lacking in many fields of research. The rapidly-expanding universe of online digital data holds the promise of allowing peer-examination and review of conclusions or analysis based on experimental or observational data, the integration of data into new forms of scholarly publishing, and the ability for subsequent users to make new and unforeseen uses and analyses of the same data-either in isolation, or in combination with, other datasets. The problem of citing online data is complicated by the lack of established practices for referring to portions or subsets of data. There are a number of initiatives in different organizations, countries, and disciplines already underway. An important set of technical and policy approaches have already been launched by the U.S. National Information Standards Organization (NISO) and other standards bodies regarding persistent identifiers and online linking. The workshop summarized in For Attribution -- Developing Data Attribution and Citation Practices and Standards: Summary of an International Workshop was organized by a steering committee under the National Research Council's (NRC's) Board on Research Data and Information, in collaboration with an international CODATA-ICSTI Task Group on Data Citation Standards and Practices. The purpose of the symposium was to examine a number of key issues related to data identification, attribution, citation, and linking to help coordinate activities in this area internationally, and to promote common practices and standards in the scientific community.

For Attribution -- Developing Data Attribution and Citation Practices and Standards: Summary of an International Workshop

Protecting Participants and Facilitating Social and Behavioral Sciences Research

The Data Preservation Alliance for the Social Sciences (Data-PASS) is a partnership of five major US institutions with a strong focus on archiving social science research The Library of Congress supports the partnership through its National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP) The goal of Data-PASS is to acquire and preserve data from opinion polls, voting records, large-scale surveys, and other social science studies at risk of being lost to the research community This paper discusses the agreements, processes, and infrastructure that provide a foundation for the collaboration

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40294601.pdf

Digital Preservation through Archival Collaboration: The Data Preservation Alliance for the Social Sciences

Social science data are an unusual part of the past, present, and future of digital preservation. They are both an unqualified success, due to long-lived and sustainable archival organizations, and in need of further development because not all digital content is being preserved. This article is about the Data Preservation Alliance for the Social Sciences (Data-PASS), a project supported by the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP), which is a partnership of five major U.S. social science data archives. Broadly speaking, Data-PASS has the goal of ensuring that at-risk social science data are identified, acquired, and preserved, and that we have a future-oriented organization that could collaborate on those preservation tasks for the future. Throughout the life of the Data-PASS project we have worked to identify digital materials that have never been systematically archived, and to appraise and acquire them. As the project has progressed, however, it has increasingly turned its attention from identifying and acquiring legacy and at-risk social science data to identifying ongoing and future research projects that will produce data. This article is about the project's history, with an emphasis of the issues that underlay the transition from looking backward to looking forward.

/pdf/from-preserving-the-past-to-preserving-the-future-the-data-1pliubwjyw.pdf

Copeland H. Young

Papers

Digital Preservation through Archival Collaboration: The Data Preservation Alliance for the Social Sciences

From Preserving the Past to Preserving the Future: The Data-PASS Project and the Challenges of Preserving Digital Social Science Data