Anomie of researchers in data sharing

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245.29.122627

Keywords:

anomie, data sharing, research data

Abstract

Data sharing is standard practice in some disciplines, while in others it is particularly critical, depending on factors such as individual researchers’ behavior or disciplinary culture. Anomie in data sharing can occur when the sets of cultural values that govern the  researcher’ conduct and institutional goals are out of balance, with cultural values or vested interests having greater relevance than institutional goals. Thus, individuals perceive themselves in disagreement  with what institutions require and practice deviant behaviors, with  possible data retention . The objective was to identify and discuss factors that can establish a state of anomie in researchers in the data sharing process, presenting a framework with the identified factors. The collection occurred through triangulation with the application of a questionnaire, a structured interview, and document analysis. With the documentary analysis, a framework with thirteen indexes was presented, based on the theoretical frameworks, W. Richard Scott's Institutional Theory, Icek Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior, and Youngseek Kim's proposed data repository sharing behavior research model. It is concluded that anomie is related to factors such as lack of clarity of laws and regulations, imbalance between institutional goals and the ways to achieve them, non-compliance with rules, and denial of morals.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Elizabete Cristina de Souza de Aguiar Monteiro, Universidade Estadual Paulista

Doutora em Ciência da Informação

Ricardo César Gonçalves Sant'Ana, Universidade Estadual Paulista

Docente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência da Informação

References

AJZEN, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, Maryland Heights, v. 52, n. 2, p. 179-211, 1991.

ALBAGLI, S. Ciência aberta em questão. In: ALBAGLI, S.; MACIEL, M. L.; ABDO, A. H. (org.). Ciência aberta, questões abertas. Brasília, DF: IBICT; Rio de Janeiro: UNIRIO, 2015. p. 9-25.

ALEIXO, D. V. B. O estado de anomia dos dados no acesso aos dados governamentais abertos no Brasil. 2020. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência da Informação) - Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Marília, 2020.

BARDIN, L. Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2010.

BAUMAN, Z. Modernidade Líquida. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 2001.

BOAI. Budapest Open Access Initiative. Hungary, 2002. Disponível em: https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/. Acesso em: 22 jul. 2022.

BEZJAK, S. et al. Manual de formação em Ciência Aberta. Hannover: Foster, 2018.

DURKHEIM, E. Da divisão do trabalho social. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1999.

FRANCO, M. L. P. B. Análise de conteúdo. 2. ed. Brasília, DF: Liber Livros, 2008.

KIM, Y. Fostering scientists’ data sharing behaviors via data repositories, journal supplements, and personal communication methods. Information Processing & Management, Elmsford, v. 53, n. 4, p. 871-885, 2017.

KIM, Y.; ADLER, M. Social scientists’ data sharing behaviors: investigating the roles 241 of individual motivations, institutional pressures, and data repositories. International Journal of Information Management, Guildford, v. 35, n. 4, p. 408-418, ago. 2015.

KIM, Y.; STANTON, J. M. Institutional and individual factors affecting scientists data sharing behaviors: a multilevel analysis. Journal Of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Hoboken, v. 67, n. 4, p. 776-799, 2016.

KIM, Y.; ZHANG, P. Understanding data sharing behaviors of STEM researchers: the roles of attitudes, norms, and data repositories. Library & Information Science Research, Noorwoold, v. 37, n. 3, p. 189-200, jul. 2015.

LEGACY.EARLHAM. Bethesda statement on Open Access publishing. Maryland, 2003. Disponível em: http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm. Acesso em: 22 jul. 2022.

MERTON, R. K. Sociologia: teoria e estrutura. São Paulo: Mestre Jou, 1968.

MERTON, R. K. The normative structure of science. In: MERTON, R. K. The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973. p. 223-280.

MONTEIRO, E. C. S. A.; SANT’ANA, R. Factors that influence researchers' state of anomie in the research data sharing process. Mobile Networks and Applications, Amsterdam, v. 27, p. 1952-1957, apr. 2022.

MORA, F. (coord.). Compromisos de las universidades ante la Open Science. Madri: CRUE Universidades Espanholas, 2019.

OPEN ACCESS. Berlin declaration on Open Access to knowledge in the sicence and humanities. Berlin, 2003. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration. Acesso em: 22 jul. 2022.

PONTIKA, N. et al. Fostering Open Science to research using a Taxonomy and an eLearning Portal. In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON KNOWLEDGE TECHNOLOGIES AND DATA DRIVEN BUSINESS, 15., 2015, Graz. Anais [...]. Milton Keynes: The Open University, 2015. p. 1-8.

QUEIROZ, V. Anomia social e alienação: Émile Durkheim. São Paulo: Colunas Tortas, 2015.

RIBEIRO, F. M. V. Nuances da sociologia do desvio em Émile Durkheim. Revista Cadernos de Ciências Sociais da UFRPE, Recife. v. 1, n. 1, jul./dez. p. 1-19, 2012.

SANTOS, P. X. (coord.). Livro verde - Ciência aberta e dados abertos: mapeamento e análise de políticas, infraestruturas e estratégias em perspectiva nacional e internacional. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2017.

SCOTT, W. R. Contemporary institutional theory. In: SCOTT, W. R. Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 1995. p. 32-62.

TSAHURIDU, E. E. Anomie and ethics at work. Journal of Business Ethics, Dordrecht, v. 69, n. 2, p. 163-174, nov. 2006.

TSAHURIDU, E. E. An exploration of factors affecting work anomia. Journal of Business Ethics, Dordrecht, v. 99, n. 2, p. 297-305, mar. 2011.

Published

2022-12-12

How to Cite

MONTEIRO, Elizabete Cristina de Souza de Aguiar; SANT’ANA, Ricardo César Gonçalves. Anomie of researchers in data sharing. Em Questão, Porto Alegre, v. 29, p. 122627, 2022. DOI: 10.19132/1808-5245.29.122627. Disponível em: https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/EmQuestao/article/view/122627. Acesso em: 11 aug. 2025.

Issue

Section

Article

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.