16 research outputs found

    Understanding the Data Management Plan as a Boundary Object through a Multi-stakeholder perspective

    Get PDF
    A three-phase Delphi study was used to investigate an emerging community for research data management in Norway and their understanding and application of data management plans (DMPs). The findings reveal visions of what the DMP should be as well as different practice approaches, yet the stakeholders present common goals. This paper discusses the different perspectives on the DMP by applying Star and Griesemer’s theory of boundary objects (Star & Griesemer, 1989). The debate on what the DMP is and the findings presented are relevant to all research communities currently implementing DMP procedures and requirements. The current discussions about DMPs tend to be distant from the active researchers and limited to the needs of funders and institutions rather than to the usefulness for researchers. By analysing the DMP as a boundary object, plastic and adaptable yet with a robust identity (Star & Griesemer, 1989), and by translating between worlds where collaboration on data sharing can take place we expand the perspectives and include all stakeholders. An understanding of the DMP as a boundary object can shift the focus from shaping a DMP which fulfils funders’ requirements to enabling collaboration on data management and sharing across domains using standardised forms.  [This paper is a conference pre-print presented at IDCC 2020 after lightweight peer review.

    Understanding the Data Management Plan as a Boundary Object through a Multi-stakeholder perspective

    Get PDF
    A three-phase Delphi study was used to investigate an emerging community for research data management in Norway and their understanding and application of data management plans (DMPs). The findings reveal visions of what the DMP should be as well as different practice approaches, yet the stakeholders present common goals. This paper discusses the different perspectives on the DMP by applying Star and Griesemer’s theory of boundary objects (Star & Griesemer, 1989). The debate on what the DMP is and the findings presented are relevant to all research communities currently implementing DMP procedures and requirements. The current discussions about DMPs tend to be distant from the active researchers and limited to the needs of funders and institutions rather than to the usefulness for researchers. By analysing the DMP as a boundary object, plastic and adaptable yet with a robust identity (Star & Griesemer, 1989), and by translating between worlds where collaboration on data sharing can take place we expand the perspectives and include all stakeholders. An understanding of the DMP as a boundary object can shift the focus from shaping a DMP which fulfils funders’ requirements to enabling collaboration on data management and sharing across domains using standardised forms

    Dealing with privacy – Personal privacy from a research data management perspective

    Get PDF
    Sharing research data is increasingly required by key stakeholders, such as funding agencies and journals. However, sharing human subjects data poses multiple issues around protecting these subjects' privacy. This poster examines these issues through a Delphi study, comprising interviews and questionnaires, of stakeholders (n=24) involved in data curation and sharing in Norway. Two particular contexts are considered: 1) privacy in international research collaborations and 2) maintaining research subjects' trust in the re-searcher. The findings presented in this poster show tensions between maintaining subjects' privacy, maintaining trust, and advancing research. These tensions are complicated further by conflicting perspectives on privacy held by different stakeholders. Researchers and other stakeholders must balance these aspects throughout the data lifecycle, from data collection to decisions about sharing. All stakeholders involved in data sharing should pay attention to research subjects through dialog and negotiation

    Data sharing in the life sciences : a study of researchers at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences

    Get PDF
    Digital research data collected in the sciences has the potential to be reused and shared openly. Several arguments for such sharing have come forward both from funders and researchers during the last decade. This study investigates the attitudes towards such reuse along with current traditions for sharing, reuse and the storage of research data in the universities, particularly the Life Sciences in Norway. A comprehensive survey has been conducted among researchers at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) collecting data on various aspects of the ‘researcher – research’ data relationship. The two main focuses are practical issues regarding storage, sharing and reuse of research data and perspectives on the future of data sharing, issues regarding publishing channels and the usage of online research collaboratories are also covered. The research aims to create an understanding of how researchers handle the data they collect, how they retrieve research data for reuse from other sources and how they imagine the future potential of data sharing. Based on the understanding of these processes, recommendations for the implementation of data repositories are made. The collected data has been analyzed according to years of experience, research field and previous experience with data sharing as well as compared with data from previous studies in the field, in order to understand which factors influence the researchers’ opinion or experience. These factors are again discussed and analyzed before conclusions are drawn. The thesis concludes that the processes of data sharing are far from optimized as researchers today primarily retrieve data from colleagues. In order to create repositories for data sharing and storage, the researchers must improve their understanding of metadata to ensure that no information about the research data is lost. For the researchers to be willing to share their data certain criteria must be fulfilled, in addition, the fears among the researchers for misuse must be taken into account. Many of the attitudes towards the sharing of research data depend on where the researchers stand in their careers; experience with data sharing is to a larger extent dependent on the specific research discipline.Joint Master Degree in Digital Library Learning (DILL

    Using personas to visualize the need for data stewardship

    No full text
    There is a current discussion in universities regarding the need for dedicated research data stewards. This article presents a set of fictional personas for research data support based on experience and requests by experts in different areas of data management. Using a modified Delphi study, 24 participants from different stakeholder groups have contributed to the skills and backgrounds necessary to fulfill the needs for data stewardship. Inspired by user experience (UX) methodology, different data personas are developed to illustrate the range of skills required to support data management within universities. Further, as a competency hub for data stewards, the development of a research data support center is proposed

    Perspectives, roles, and knowledge transfer amongst stakeholders of research data sharing

    No full text
    Data sharing requires collaboration on infrastructure and a knowledge exchange amongst stakeholders while these develop solutions aiming at increasing the quality of research through data curation. Divergent perspectives amongst key stakeholders on how and why data sharing is to take place create frictions in the collaboration and development of infrastructure. In addition, new roles are emerging to facilitate data management and data curation. The professional identity of these struggle with combining and maintaining highlevel expertise in multiple domains. The problem statement approaches these frictions by asking: How do the perspectives and expertise of key stakeholders involved in research data sharing affect the collaboration and knowledge transfer amongst these? By addressing this question, the thesis aims at understanding the relation between the perspectives and expertise of key stakeholders involved in research data sharing and how these perspectives affect the collaboration and knowledge transfer amongst the stakeholders. Designed as a three-phased, modified Delphi study with data collection during a 14-month period, the study captured parts of the development of infrastructure for research data sharing. The participant group consisted of 24 expert shareholders disseminating their experiences and perspectives on the sharing and curation of research data through two interviews and one survey. The results are based on the final analysis of all the data material. This is a thesis involving compilation of three articles and a narrative (Norwegian ‘kappe’). Each of the three articles addresses specific issues within research data sharing, namely by: 1) Exploring the different data steward roles; 2) Analysing the multiple perspectives on data management plans as a facilitator for data curation and sharing; and 3) How personal privacy can be balanced with high quality research through the research data lifecycle. The narrative lifts the perspective by addressing challenges that connect the three articles as a thread; divergent perspectives, roles, expertise, and the knowledge exchange taking place to facilitate research data sharing. The thesis contributes to the understanding of research data curation as a key to high quality research. Policy and infrastructural development are interconnected with the different stakeholder groups and the motivations and expertise they hold. However, the effort made to create strong infrastructural organizations risks changing the target. The findings show how additional goals and agendas amongst stakeholders risk obscuring the focus on research quality as the goal of data curation in interpretation and application of policy. For providers of research data services to succeed, it is necessary to combine practice, learning and recognition. This is best achieved through maintaining active memberships in multiple communities; primarily, it is necessary to keep the combination of researcher and research support up to date and to apply best practice from both communities. There is a need to rethink research data support services with a focus on the identity of data stewards as domain specialists and as data management experts. This requires community building and incentives for recognition of multiple memberships. Furthermore, different research support services within universities need to work together and re-think research data services based on a common goal of creating better research. In collaborations and infrastructure development, agreements on standards, entities and definitions help to facilitate knowledge exchange. These must be developed dynamically through experience and application. A transfer of knowledge occurs between the stakeholders as standards are applied and updated; this requires lines of communication where the stakeholders with multiple identities and stewardship communities function as translators of various perspectives and creators of common understandings. Samarbeid og kunnskapsutveksling mellom involverte aktører er nødvendig når infrastrukturløsninger for deling av forskningsdata utvikles. Hensikten ved å tilrettelegge for kuratering av forskningsdata er å styrke kvaliteten på forsking. De sentrale aktørenes ulike perspektiver på hvordan og hvorfor deling av forskningsdata skal finne sted skaper uenigheter i infrastruktursamarbeidet. Parallelt med dette oppstår en ny rolle med ansvar for å legge til rette for god datahåndtering og kuratering av forskningsdata. I den profesjonelle identiteten til denne rollen ligger det et behov for ekspertise innenfor flere fagfelt. Disse problemstillingene leder til følgende spørsmål: Hvordan påvirker perspektiver og ekspertise hos sentrale aktører involvert i deling av forskningsdata samarbeidet og kunnskapsutvekslingen mellom disse? Ved å stille dette spørsmålet ønsker jeg å forstå forholdet mellom tilnærminger og ekspertise hos de sentrale aktørene involvert i deling av forskningsdata. Videre ser jeg på hvordan perspektivene påvirker samarbeid og kunnskapsutvekling mellom aktørene. Studien er utformet som en Delphi-studie i tre faser med datainnsamling over 14 måneder. Slik fanger studien deler av utviklingen av infrastruktur for deling av forskningsdata. Gruppen med deltakere bestod av 24 aktører med høy ekspertise på feltet. Deltakerne delte sine erfaringer og syn på deling og kuratering av forskningsdata i to intervjurunder samt en spørreundersøkelse. Resultatene som presenteres er basert på den samlede analysen av alle innsamlede data. Avhandlingen består av tre artikler og en kappe. Hver av de tre artiklene går inn i spesifikke tema innen forskningsdatahåndtering: 1) Utforskning av de ulike datarøkterrollene; 2) Analyse av ulike syn på hvordan datahåndteringsplanen kan legge til rette for kuratering og deling av forskningsdata; 3) Hvordan hensynene til forskningskvalitet og personvern balanseres gjennom livssyklusen til forskningsdata. Avhandlingen bidrar til forståelse av kuratering av forskningsdata som avgjørende for å styrke kvaliteten på forskning. Politikk og infrastrukturutvikling er sammenkoblet med de ulike aktørene og deres agenda og sakkyndighet. Samtidig er det en risiko for at resursene som settes inn for å skape en ny sterk infrastrukturorganisasjon fjerner fokus fra målet. Resultatene peker på at når politiske føringer skal tolkes og følges kommer andre mål og agendaer blant aktørene i veien for søkelyset på forskingskvalitet som mål for datahåndtering. For at forskningsdatastøttetjenester skal lykkes, trengs en kombinasjon av praksis, læring og annerkjennelse. Dette oppnås ved å tilrettelegge for at datarøktere kan beholde aktive medlemskap i ulike fagmiljøer, og må til for at personene som tilbyr forskningsdatastøte skal være oppdatert og anvende beste praksis fra både forsker- og forskerstøttemiljøene. Med utgangspunkt i datarøkere som både domeneeksperter og datahåndteringseksperter er det behov for å tenke nytt rundt støtte til datahåndtering. Det er både et behov for å utvikle felleskap og for få på plass insentiver som bidrar til annerkjennelse internt i de ulike fagmiljøene hvor datarøktere har sine tilhørigheter. Tettere samarbeid mellom de ulike tilbyderne av støttetjenester for forskningsdata er etterspurt og kan møtes ved at man tenker nytt om disse tjenestene der et felles mål om bedre forskning får trumfe egne agendaer. Enighet om standarder, enheter og definisjoner er med på å legge til rette for kunnskapsutveksling i samarbeid om infrastrukturutvikling. Disse må oppdateres og videreutvikles gjennom anvendelse og erfaring. I det standarder tas i bruk og holdes oppdaterte skjer en kunnskapsutveksling mellom de ulike aktørene. Denne kunnskapsutvekslingen fordrer kommunikasjonslinjer hvor aktører med tilhørighet i ulike fagfelt er i stand til å utveksle og oversette de ulike tilnærmingene og skape felles forståelser

    Perspectives, roles, and knowledge transfer amongst stakeholders of research data sharing

    No full text
    OsloMet Avhandling 2022 nr 15, Live HÃ¥ndlykken Kvale. Dissertation for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD). Department of Archivistic, Library and Information Science. Faculty of Social Sciences. OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University. Spring 2022. ISSN 2535-471X (trykt)/ ISSN 2535-5414 (online)ISBN 978-82-8364-396-1 (trykt)/ ISBN 978-82-8364-413-5 (online

    Data sharing in the life sciences : a study of researchers at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences

    No full text
    Digital research data collected in the sciences has the potential to be reused and shared openly. Several arguments for such sharing have come forward both from funders and researchers during the last decade. This study investigates the attitudes towards such reuse along with current traditions for sharing, reuse and the storage of research data in the universities, particularly the Life Sciences in Norway. A comprehensive survey has been conducted among researchers at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) collecting data on various aspects of the ‘researcher – research’ data relationship. The two main focuses are practical issues regarding storage, sharing and reuse of research data and perspectives on the future of data sharing, issues regarding publishing channels and the usage of online research collaboratories are also covered. The research aims to create an understanding of how researchers handle the data they collect, how they retrieve research data for reuse from other sources and how they imagine the future potential of data sharing. Based on the understanding of these processes, recommendations for the implementation of data repositories are made. The collected data has been analyzed according to years of experience, research field and previous experience with data sharing as well as compared with data from previous studies in the field, in order to understand which factors influence the researchers’ opinion or experience. These factors are again discussed and analyzed before conclusions are drawn. The thesis concludes that the processes of data sharing are far from optimized as researchers today primarily retrieve data from colleagues. In order to create repositories for data sharing and storage, the researchers must improve their understanding of metadata to ensure that no information about the research data is lost. For the researchers to be willing to share their data certain criteria must be fulfilled, in addition, the fears among the researchers for misuse must be taken into account. Many of the attitudes towards the sharing of research data depend on where the researchers stand in their careers; experience with data sharing is to a larger extent dependent on the specific research discipline

    Understanding the Data Management Plan as a Boundary Object through a Multi-stakeholder perspective

    No full text
    A three-phase Delphi study was used to investigate an emerging community for research data management in Norway and their understanding and application of data management plans (DMPs). The findings reveal visions of what the DMP should be as well as different practice approaches, yet the stakeholders present common goals. This paper discusses the different perspectives on the DMP by applying Star and Griesemer’s theory of boundary objects (Star and Griesemer, 1989). The debate on what the DMP is and the findings presented here are relevant to all research communities currently implementing DMP procedures and requirements. The current discussions about DMPs tend to be distant from the active researchers and limited to the needs of funders and institutions rather than to the usefulness for researchers. By analysing the DMP as a boundary object, plastic and adaptable yet with a robust identity, translating between worlds (Star and Griesemer, 1989) where collaboration on data sharing can take place, we expand the perspectives and include all stakeholders. An understanding of the DMP as a boundary object can shift the focus from shaping a DMP which fulfils funders’ requirements to enabling collaboration on data management and sharing across domains using standardised forms

    Privacy protection throughout the research data life cycle

    No full text
    Introduction. The sharing and reuse of research data is gradually becoming best practice in research. However, multiple frictions exist between realising stakeholders’ ambitions for research and research data sharing and addressing legal, social and cultural imperatives for protecting data subjects’ privacy. Through identifying and addressing frictions between personal privacy and research, our paper offers advice to research data management services on how to approach personal privacy in research data, sharing using the research data life cycle as the context. Method. A three-phase Delphi study on a population comprising twenty-four stakeholders involved in research data curation in Norway. Data were collected during three consecutive rounds over fourteen months. Analysis. The data were analysed qualitatively using themes following exploratory sequential design methods. After three rounds of data collection, the entire corpus of data were connected and analysed thematically according to integrated analysis. Results. The findings show multiple tensions between maintaining research subjects’ right to privacy and advancing research through data sharing. This paper identifies and analyses three particular sources of tension: 1) maintaining trust with the research participants, 2) managing divergent views of privacy in international and intercultural research collaborations and 3) interpreting and applying policy. The divergent motivations and perspectives on privacy held by different stakeholders complicate these tensions. Conclusions. Researchers, research data management support staff and data organizations must reconcile these motivations and resolve tensions throughout the data life cycle, from collection to archiving and eventual sharing. Through dialogue and negotiation, all stakeholders involved in data sharing should aim to respect the research subjects’ own understandings of privacy
    corecore