Fixing a Hole: Discerning Usage Patterns of Datasets in an Open Access Data Repository

In recent years, the federal government has mandated that data produced using federal funds be made available to the public. This, and the recent surge in the amount of data produced and the size of datasets, have made the pressure to share data ever the more urgent. Data can be shared using open access repositories, which can be institutional or domain-specific. In the social sciences in particular, data sharing is unique because of the various sources and types of data produced. This paper examined the usage patterns of the datasets in one social science repository based on production date. It found that the average number of download statistics for each year was remarkably consistent, but the data were extremely skewed. Further analyses could look at usage patterns based on topic/keyword, non-use of datasets, or time of usage of particular datasets.Master of Science in Library Scienc

Building Relationships Project Update 2007

In the digital age, what is the best way to build and sustain data archives? Collaborating with other archives could improve how they operate and grow, but building relationships consumes time and scarce resources. Is it worth the effort? Six major digital archives are exploring this issue through a partnership funded by the Library of Congress Infrastructure and Preservation Program. This partnership a federated approach to data archives require building relationships at the producer, administrative, and program application development levels. Now two years into its development, this alliance has accomplished a number of important objectives in each of these realms. This paper highlights the experiences of two alliance members, the ICPSR and the Odum Institute. Our interactions and accomplishments lead us to believe that the benefits of partnerships such as this one far exceed the costs they entail. More particularly, establishing collaborative relationships between archives achieves four objectives, as follows: (1) It facilitates communications between archiving professionals, enhancing efficiency by creating a common pool of knowledge and a framework for ongoing interactions and education; (2) It improves our relationships with data providers by enabling us to provide a better and more durable quality of service; (3) It allows archivists to build networks of relationships with software developers, increasing the probability of identifying, developing, and adopting broadly functional applications serving a multiplicity of needs and audiences; and (4) In promoting development and adoption of common standards, it dramatically improves the probability of effectively networked collections and diminishing the costs involved in creating them. While our focus is social science data, the approach would work in many fields

Building Relationships Project Update 2007

In the digital age, what is the best way to build and sustain data archives? Collaborating with other archives could improve how they operate and grow, but building relationships consumes time and scarce resources. Is it worth the effort? Six major digital archives are exploring this issue through a partnership funded by the Library of Congress Infrastructure and Preservation Program. This partnership a federated approach to data archives require building relationships at the producer, administrative, and program application development levels. Now two years into its development, this alliance has accomplished a number of important objectives in each of these realms. This paper highlights the experiences of two alliance members, the ICPSR and the Odum Institute. Our interactions and accomplishments lead us to believe that the benefits of partnerships such as this one far exceed the costs they entail. More particularly, establishing collaborative relationships between archives achieves four objectives, as follows: (1) It facilitates communications between archiving professionals, enhancing efficiency by creating a common pool of knowledge and a framework for ongoing interactions and education; (2) It improves our relationships with data providers by enabling us to provide a better and more durable quality of service; (3) It allows archivists to build networks of relationships with software developers, increasing the probability of identifying, developing, and adopting broadly functional applications serving a multiplicity of needs and audiences; and (4) In promoting development and adoption of common standards, it dramatically improves the probability of effectively networked collections and diminishing the costs involved in creating them. While our focus is social science data, the approach would work in many fields