Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity

Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion, and U.S. Foreign Policy

We must all accept that science is data and that data are science, and thus provide for, and justify the need for the support of, much-improved data curation. (Hanson, Sugden, & Alberts) 
 
Researchers are producing an unprecedented deluge of data by using new methods and instrumentation. Others may wish to mine these data for new discoveries and innovations. However, research data are not readily available as sharing is common in only a few fields such as astronomy and genomics. Data sharing practices in other fields vary widely. Moreover, research data take many forms, are handled in many ways, using many approaches, and often are difficult to interpret once removed from their initial context. Data sharing is thus a conundrum. Four rationales for sharing data are examined, drawing examples from the sciences, social sciences, and humanities: (1) to reproduce or to verify research, (2) to make results of publicly funded research available to the public, (3) to enable others to ask new questions of extant data, and (4) to advance the state of research and innovation. These rationales differ by the arguments for sharing, by beneficiaries, and by the motivations and incentives of the many stakeholders involved. The challenges are to understand which data might be shared, by whom, with whom, under what conditions, why, and to what effects. Answers will inform data policy and practice. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

科研数据共享的挑战 (The Conundrum of Sharing Research Data)

The development of a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection is on the way. To prepare for public availability, the acceptability of a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine and willingness to pay (WTP) were a...

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21645515.2020.1790279

The use of the health belief model to assess predictors of intent to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and willingness to pay.

Open access, open data, open source and other open scholarship practices are growing in popularity and necessity. However, widespread adoption of these practices has not yet been achieved. One reason is that researchers are uncertain about how sharing their work will affect their careers. We review literature demonstrating that open research is associated with increases in citations, media attention, potential collaborators, job opportunities and funding opportunities. These findings are evidence that open research practices bring significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.

/pdf/how-open-science-helps-researchers-succeed-ucr4o50355.pdf

How open science helps researchers succeed.

The incorporation of data sharing into the research lifecycle is an important part of modern scholarly debate. In this study, the DataONE Usability and Assessment working group addresses two primary goals: To examine the current state of data sharing and reuse perceptions and practices among research scientists as they compare to the 2009/2010 baseline study, and to examine differences in practices and perceptions across age groups, geographic regions, and subject disciplines. We distributed surveys to a multinational sample of scientific researchers at two different time periods (October 2009 to July 2010 and October 2013 to March 2014) to observe current states of data sharing and to see what, if any, changes have occurred in the past 3–4 years. We also looked at differences across age, geographic, and discipline-based groups as they currently exist in the 2013/2014 survey. Results point to increased acceptance of and willingness to engage in data sharing, as well as an increase in actual data sharing behaviors. However, there is also increased perceived risk associated with data sharing, and specific barriers to data sharing persist. There are also differences across age groups, with younger respondents feeling more favorably toward data sharing and reuse, yet making less of their data available than older respondents. Geographic differences exist as well, which can in part be understood in terms of collectivist and individualist cultural differences. An examination of subject disciplines shows that the constraints and enablers of data sharing and reuse manifest differently across disciplines. Implications of these findings include the continued need to build infrastructure that promotes data sharing while recognizing the needs of different research communities. Moving into the future, organizations such as DataONE will continue to assess, monitor, educate, and provide the infrastructure necessary to support such complex grand science challenges.

/pdf/changes-in-data-sharing-and-data-reuse-practices-and-4n2oz0eb59.pdf

Changes in data sharing and data reuse practices and perceptions among scientists worldwide

Implementing Reproducible Research

The current study examined the effects of framing in promotional health messages on intention to vaccinate against seasonal influenza virus. The findings of an experimental study (N = 86) indicated that exposure to both benefits and side effects of vaccination (gain-framed with risk disclosure message) led to lower intention to receive the flu vaccine. This relationship was mediated by both perceived vaccine efficacy and felt ambivalence in a serial order, revealing the underlying psychological mechanisms important for understanding health-related behaviors. Theoretical implications of constructing sub-framed messages are discussed and the concept of second-order framing is introduced.

Effects of Message Framing on Influenza Vaccination: Understanding the Role of Risk Disclosure, Perceived Vaccine Efficacy, and Felt Ambivalence

This cross-cultural experiment (N = 620) tested the impact of the use of anonymous sources on perceived news story credibility in America and China, two countries with assumed different journalisti...

Anonymous sources hurt credibility of news stories across cultures: A comparative experiment in America and China:

This study explored, by comparative thematic analysis, the conceptualization of trust in news media in Serbia, Macedonia, and Croatia—three countries of Eastern Europe where past oppressive regimes might have left a heritage of distrust in all institutions. The analysis of 61 in-depth interviews showed the coexistence of three connotations of trust: trust as faith in news media as expert systems, trust in journalistic selectivity (found in all three countries), and trust as confidence in news media (found only in the Serbian sample). The analysis of the interviews also indicated a possible new dimension of journalistic selectivity and showed that, when looking for the truth in media messages, Serbians, Macedonians, and Croatians relied more on themselves than on the trustworthiness of their news media systems. The implications of these results on the measurement of trust in news media and on the relationship of Eastern Europeans toward their news media systems are discussed in light of sociological theori...

Ivanka Pjesivac

Papers

Changes in data sharing and data reuse practices and perceptions among scientists worldwide

Implementing Reproducible Research

Effects of Message Framing on Influenza Vaccination: Understanding the Role of Risk Disclosure, Perceived Vaccine Efficacy, and Felt Ambivalence

Anonymous sources hurt credibility of news stories across cultures: A comparative experiment in America and China:

The Truth Between the Lines: Conceptualization of Trust in News Media in Serbia, Macedonia, and Croatia