Academic data sharing is a way for researchers to collaborate and thereby
meet the needs of an increasingly complex research landscape. It enables
researchers to verify results and to pursuit new research questions with "old"
data. It is therefore not surprising that data sharing is advocated by funding
agencies, journals, and researchers alike. We surveyed 2661 individual academic
researchers across all disciplines on their dealings with data, their
publication practices, and motives for sharing or withholding research data.
The results for 1564 valid responses show that researchers across disciplines
recognise the benefit of secondary research data for their own work and for
scientific progress as a whole-still they only practice it in moderation. An
explanation for this evidence could be an academic system that is not driven by
monetary incentives, nor the desire for scientific progress, but by individual
reputation-expressed in (high ranked journal) publications. We label this
system a Reputation Economy. This special economy explains our findings that
show that researchers have a nuanced idea how to provide adequate formal
recognition for making data available to others-namely data citations. We
conclude that data sharing will only be widely adopted among research
professionals if sharing pays in form of reputation. Thus, policy measures that
intend to foster research collaboration need to understand academia as a
reputation economy. Successful measures must value intermediate products, such
as research data, more highly than it is the case now