Suchergebnisse

This article reports the results of a survey conducted between 18th November and 18th December 2017 about different aspects of data sharing: tools used in building metadata, problems encountered in order to share the data, the propensity to share the data, the satisfaction obtained over different working tasks. After a short description of the data gathering task, the report describes the sample, the univariate distribution of the most important variables related to the work of data archiving and the attitudes concerning the data sharing activity: problems encountered, propensity to share the data, satisfaction obtained. Part of the report illustrates models suitable for interpreting the results and finally gives some advice for promoting data services. Some international comparisons of the results are proposed in the annex.

Mind the Gap: Global Data Sharing

Abstract
Independent data stewardship remains a core component of good data governance practice. Yet, there is a need for more robust independent data stewardship models that are able to oversee data-driven, multi-party data sharing, usage and re-usage, which can better incorporate citizen representation, especially in relation to personal data. We propose that data foundations—inspired by Channel Islands' foundations laws—provide a workable model for good data governance not only in the Channel Islands, but also elsewhere. A key advantage of this model—in addition to leveraging existing legislation and building on established precedent—is the statutory role of the guardian that is a unique requirement in the Channel Islands, and when interpreted in a data governance model provides the independent data steward. The principal purpose for this paper, therefore, is to demonstrate why data foundations are well suited to the needs of data sharing initiatives. We further examine how data foundations could be established in practice—and provide key design principles that should be used to guide the design and development of any data foundation.

Abstract
This paper examines the relationship between p-hacking, publication bias and data-sharing policies. We collect 38,876 test statistics from 1,106 articles published in leading economic journals between 2002–20. We find that, while data-sharing policies increase the provision of data, they do not decrease the extent of p-hacking and publication bias. Similarly, articles that use hard-to-access administrative data or third-party surveys, as compared to those that use easier-to-access (e.g., author-collected) data, are not different in their p-hacking and publication extent. Voluntary provision of data by authors on their home pages offers no evidence of reduced p-hacking.

Qualitative data provide rich information on research questions in diverse fields. Recent calls for increased transparency and openness in research emphasize data sharing. However, qualitative data sharing has yet to become the norm internationally and is particularly uncommon in the United States. Guidance for archiving and secondary use of qualitative data is required for progress in this regard. In this study, we review the benefits and concerns associated with qualitative data sharing and then describe the results of a content analysis of guidelines from international repositories that archive qualitative data. A minority of repositories provide qualitative data sharing guidelines. Of the guidelines available, there is substantial variation in whether specific topics are addressed. Some topics, such as removing direct identifiers, are consistently addressed, while others, such as providing an anonymization log, are not. We discuss the implications of our study for education, best practices, and future research.