Mandated data archiving greatly improves access to research data

The data underlying scientific papers should be accessible to researchers both now and in the future, but how best can we ensure that these data are available? Here we examine the effectiveness of four approaches to data archiving: no stated archiving policy, recommending (but not requiring) archiving, and two versions of mandating data deposition at acceptance. We control for differences between data types by trying to obtain data from papers that use a single, widespread population genetic analysis, STRUCTURE. At one extreme, we found that mandated data archiving policies that require the inclusion of a data availability statement in the manuscript improve the odds of finding the data online almost a thousand-fold compared to having no policy. However, archiving rates at journals with less stringent policies were only very slightly higher than those with no policy at all. At one extreme, we found that mandated data archiving policies that require the inclusion of a data availability statement in the manuscript improve the odds of finding the data online almost a thousand fold compared to having no policy. However, archiving rates at journals with less stringent policies were only very slightly higher than those with no policy at all. We also assessed the effectiveness of asking for data directly from authors and obtained over half of the requested datasets, albeit with about 8 days delay and some disagreement with authors. Given the long term benefits of data accessibility to the academic community, we believe that journal based mandatory data archiving policies and mandatory data availability statements should be more widely adopted

Accreditation for transnational research access to official micro-data in Europe

Accreditation is a central element of the framework for research access to micro-data that currently is understood to be a barrier for transnational access. To better understand the nature and causes of the problem, and to devise potential solutions, we have mapped current arrangements across European countries. We identify similarities and differences as well as areas for improvement. Our key results are encouraging: almost all European countries do provide research access to their micro-data, and most of them allow non-national European researchers to access their data, though under varying conditions. However, some obstacles remain, and some of them require negotiation and coordination at policy-making levels. To overcome existing barriers, we propose some potential options for the future and concrete steps towards improvement, which if explored from now on, could substantially improve access while still ensuring safe and lawful conditions, and reducing the administrative financial burden of data providers

Access to and use of judicial and other personal data in criminological research: privacy and data protection perspectives

C

Access to Research Data: Addressing the Problem through Journal Data Sharing Policies

There is a growing consensus in the broader research community, including libraries and other information repositories, that sharing of research data is vital both for transparency and possible reuse. Logically the sharing should be in the form of data held in suitable repositories which is linked to effective access points such as library catalogues. The journals in which the research appears have a central role in this process. The JoRD Project atNottinghamUniversityinvestigated the current state of journal data sharing policies through a survey of sample titles, and explored the views and practices of stakeholders including the research community and its funders, publishers and editors. The project identified that although a percentage of journals did have a policy on data sharing, they were in a minority, and policies generally encouraged good practice rather than made it a firm requirement. Many of the policies examined had little to say on standardised formats for data, metadata, or the use of data repositories. If there is to be genuine data sharing, initiatives to encourage journals to set out policies that mandate sharing in well-specified and appropriate forms are essential

Safe to Be Open: Study on the Protection of Research Data and Recommendations for Access and Usage

Openness has become a common concept in a growing number of scientific and academic fields. Expressions such as Open Access (OA) or Open Content (OC) are often employed for publications of papers and research results, or are contained as conditions in tenders issued by a number of funding agencies. More recently the concept of Open Data (OD) is of growing interest in some fields, particularly those that produce large amounts of data – which are not usually protected by standard legal tools such as copyright. However, a thorough understanding of the meaning of Openness – especially its legal implications – is usually lacking. Open Access, Public Access, Open Content, Open Data, Public Domain. All these terms are often employed to indicate that a given paper, repository or database does not fall under the traditional “closed” scheme of default copyright rules. However, the differences between all these terms are often largely ignored or misrepresented, especially when the scientist in question is not familiar with the law generally and copyright in particular – a very common situation in all scientific fields. On 17 July 2012 the European Commission published its Communication to the European Parliament and the Council entitled “Towards better access to scientific information: Boosting the benefits of public investments in research”. As the Commission observes, “discussions of the scientific dissemination system have traditionally focused on access to scientific publications – journals and monographs. However, it is becoming increasingly important to improve access to research data (experimental results, observations and computer-generated information), which forms the basis for the quantitative analysis underpinning many scientific publications”. The Commission believes that through more complete and wider access to scientific publications and data, the pace of innovation will accelerate and researchers will collaborate so that duplication of efforts will be avoided. Moreover, open research data will allow other researchers to build on previous research results, as it will allow involvement of citizens and society in the scientific process. In the Communication the Commission makes explicit reference to open access models of publications and dissemination of research results, and the reference is not only to access and use but most significantly to reuse of publications as well as research data. The Communication marks an official new step on the road to open access to publicly funded research results in science and the humanities in Europe. Scientific publications are no longer the only elements of its open access policy: research data upon which publications are based should now also be made available to the public. As noble as the open access goal is, however, the expansion of the open access policy to publicly funded research data raises a number of legal and policy issues that are often distinct from those concerning the publication of scientific articles and monographs. Since open access to research data – rather than publications – is a relatively new policy objective, less attention has been paid to the specific features of research data. An analysis of the legal status of such data, and on how to make it available under the correct licence terms, is therefore the subject of the following sections

Experimenting with the trial of a research data audit: some preliminary findings about data types, access to data and factors for long term preservation

Developing systems and services for the effective and efficient management of research data as well as addressing issues around their long term curation is an area of increasing activity in UK Higher Education. This paper discusses some preliminary results from a questionnaire survey, conducted as part of the trial implementation of the Data Audit Framework Methodology at University College London (UCL). Fifty seven (57) academic and research staff from 5 designated departments and an interdisciplinary research centre provided information about the nature of their research and the types of primary research data they produce. The survey explored factors that could impact on access, use and preservation of such data. The preliminary results indicate that researchers recognise the potential usefulness of such data for other researchers as well as their long term value. Retaining primary research data after the end of the funding period and re-using them for initiating further research are practices already acknowledged. However, ownership, copyright and restrictions on access to research data can be hazy areas for academic and research staff and require further investigation, advice and support. The value of primary research data appears to be closely linked to the context within the data which were generated