Differences in production, sharing and (re)using research data, from researchers’ perspective of Chemistry, Anthropology, and Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245253.321-347Keywords:
Comunicação científica, Ciência aberta, Dados de pesquisa, Diferenças disciplinares, Gestão de dados de pesquisaAbstract
Discussions about the production/achievement practices, sharing and (re)using research data under the spectrum of the disciplinary diferences have been relevant to the scholarly communication process, mainly in the light of Open Science. The study aimed to identify production/achievement practices, sharing and (re)using research data in Chemistry, Anthropology and Education. Methodologically, the research nature is of a descriptive nature, adopting a qualitative investigation strategy and survey method. The participants of this study were different tenured professors from the postgraduate program in Chemistry (three researchers), Anthropology (three researchers) and Education (four researchers) at the University of Brasília (UnB). The data collection proceeded through semi-structured interviews with these researchers and NVivo software (Starter Edition) assisted the data collected analysis procedures. The results obtained in the study demonstrated diferences among the three disciplinary, concerning aspects influencing the data production/achievement, stimulating or inhibiting factors of the data sharing and stimulating or inhibiting factors of the research data (re)use. Among the conclusions, it is emphasized that such disciplinary differences are fundamental requirements for the development or improvement of information systems that manage research data.
Downloads
References
BORGMAN, C. L. Scholarship in the digital age: information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007.
BORGMAN, C. L. Big data, little data, no data: scholarship in the networked world. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2015.
BORGMAN, C. L. The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Maryland, v. 63, n. 6, p. 1059-1078, jun. 2012.
CAPES. Plataforma Sucupira. Brasília. 2017.
CARVALHO, É. R. S. de. Diferenças na produção, compartilhamento e (re)uso de dados: a percepção de pesquisadores da química, antropologia e educação. 2018. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciência da Informação) – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência da Informação, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, 2018.
CETINA, K. K. Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
CRESWELL, J. W. Projeto de pesquisa: métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. 3. ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2010.
DATAONE. Data management guide for public participation in scientific research. [S.l.]: DATAONE, 2013.
FEDERER, L. Research data management in the age of big data: roles and opportunities for librarians. Information Services & Use, [s.l.], v. 36, n. 1-2, p. 35-43, 2016.
FLICK, U. Desenho da pesquisa qualitativa. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2009.
FRIESIKE, S.; FECHER, B. Open Science: one term, five schools of thought. In: BARTLING, S.; FRIESIKE, S. (ed.). Opening Science: the evolving guide on how the Internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. London: Springer Open, 2014.
GALLIANO, A. G. O método científico: teoria e prática. São Paulo: Harbra, 1986.
HUNT, James R.; BALDOCCHI, D. D.; VAN INGEN, C. Redefinição da Ciência Ecológica com o uso de dados. In: HEY, T.; TANSLEY, S.; TOLLE, K. (org.). O quarto paradigma: descobertas científicas na era da e-Science. São Paulo: Oficina de Textos, 2011.
INTER-UNIVERSITY CONSORTIUM FOR POLITICAL AND SOCIAL RESEARCH (ICPRS). Guide to social Science data preparation and archiving. Michigan: Institute for Social Research University, 2012.
KIM, Y.; ZHANG, P. Understanding data sharing behaviors of STEM researchers: the roles of attitudes, norms, and data repositories. Library and Information Science Research, New York, v. 37, n. 3, p. 189-200, 2015.
KIRUB, A. Agricultural research data management: principles, policy and practice. Ethiopian: Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, 2016.
KOLB, D. A. Learning styles and disciplinary diferences. In: CHICKERING, A. W. (org.). The modern american college: responding to the new realities of diverse students and a changing Society. Califórnia: Jossey-Bass, 1981.
MEADOWS, A. J. A comunicação científica. Brasília: Briquet de Lemos, 1999.
MUELLER, S. P. M. A publicação da ciência: áreas científicas e seus canais preferenciais. DataGramaZero: Revista de Ciência da Informação, Rio de Janeiro, v. 6, n. 1, fev. 2005.
PARK, H.; WOLFRAM, D. An examination of research data sharing and reuse: implications for data citation practice. Scientometrics, Hoboken, v. 111, n. 1, p. 443–461, 2017.
PIWOWAR, H. A. et al. Towards a data sharing culture: recommendations for leadership from Academic Health Centers. PLOS Medicine, Bethesda, v. 5, n. 9, p. 1315-1319, set. 2008.
SAYÃO, L. F.; SALES, L. F. Dados abertos de pesquisa: ampliando o conceito de acesso livre. Revista Eletrônica de Comunicação, Informação & Inovação em Saúde, Rio de Janeiro, v. 8, n. 2, p. 76-92, jun. 2014.
SAYÃO, L. F.; SALES, L. F. Guia de gestão de dados de pesquisa para bibliotecários e pesquisadores. Rio de Janeiro: CNEN/IEN, 2015.
SIDLER, M. Open Science and the three cultures: expanding Open Science Domains of Knowledge Creation. In: BARTLING, S.; FRIESIKE, S. (ed.). Opening Science: the evolving guide on how the Internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Heidelberg: Springer Open, 2014.
UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS). The United States Geological Survey Science data lifecycle model. Virginia: Geological Survey, 2013.
UNIVERSIDADE DE MELBOURNE. Management of research data and records policy. Melbourne: University of Melbourne, 2013.
UNIVERSIDADE DO MINHO. SERVIÇOS DE DOCUMENTAÇÃO (SDUM). Análise dos resultados do inquérito sobre dados científicos produzidos na Universidade do Minho. Braga: Universidade do Minho, 2014.
YOON, A.; KIM, Y. Social scientists' data reuse behaviors: exploring the roles of attitudinal beliefs, attitudes, norms, and data repositories. Library and Information Science Research, [s.l.], v. 39, n. 3, p. 224-233, 2017.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Érika Rayanne Silva de Carvalho, Fernando César Lima Leite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors will keep their copyright and grant the journal with the right of first publication, the work licensed under License Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which allows for the sharing of work and the recognition of authorship.
Authors can take on additional contracts separately for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal, such as publishing in an institutional repository, acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
The articles are open access and free. In accordance with the license, you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
