Sharing your coding schemas: Developing a Platform to fit within the Qualitative Research Workflow

Qualitative coding schemas are an essential part of qualitative research used in methods like Grounded Theory. To date, there is no platform to share these coding schemas. Sharing and exchanging these coding schemas has a great potential when it comes to the traceability of qualitative research and well as the re-use of coding schemas. Based on an interview study with qualitative researchers, we propose concepts for integrating a new platform for sharing qualitative coding schemas. Based on theoretical work by Birnholtz and Bietz (2002), it became clear that an easy-to-use system can foster the acceptance and the willingness of researchers to share their coding schemas. We identified three major points to focus for this on: the governance of the platform, the development of the ontology itself and integrating the sharing of qualitative coding schemas into the workflow of researchers by enabling direct upload from the qualitative coding software.

[1]  P. Bryan Heidorn,et al.  Shedding Light on the Dark Data in the Long Tail of Science , 2008, Libr. Trends.

[2]  Julian Hocker,et al.  Participatory design for ontologies: a case study of an open science ontology for qualitative coding schemas , 2020, Aslib J. Inf. Manag..

[3]  Cristina Ribeiro,et al.  Hands-On Data Publishing with Researchers: Five Experiments with Metadata in Multiple Domains , 2019, IRCDL.

[4]  Maria-Esther Vidal,et al.  Towards a Knowledge Graph for Science , 2018, WIMS.

[5]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  Big Data, Little Data, No Data: Scholarship in the Networked World , 2014 .

[6]  Michael J. Zigmond,et al.  The Essential Nature of Sharing in Science , 2010, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[7]  Herman Aguinis,et al.  Transparency and replicability in qualitative research: The case of interviews with elite informants , 2019, Strategic Management Journal.

[8]  Cristina Ribeiro,et al.  Involving Data Creators in an Ontology-Based Design Process for Metadata Models , 2017 .

[9]  Harlan M. Krumholz,et al.  A Historic Moment for Open Science: The Yale University Open Data Access Project and Medtronic , 2013, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science , 2015, Science.

[11]  Erik Schultes,et al.  The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship , 2016, Scientific Data.

[12]  Jeremy P. Birnholtz,et al.  Data at work: supporting sharing in science and engineering , 2003, GROUP.

[13]  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers,et al.  Data Sharing in Psychology: A Survey on Barriers and Preconditions , 2018 .

[14]  Nancy A. Van House,et al.  Cooperative knowledge work and practices of trust: sharing environmental planning data sets , 1998, CSCW '98.

[15]  Alex O. Holcombe,et al.  Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices , 2013 .

[16]  Elizabeth Yakel,et al.  Social scientists' satisfaction with data reuse , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[17]  Eric G. Campbell,et al.  Sharing in Science , 2002, American Scientist.

[18]  Dieter Fensel,et al.  Knowledge Engineering: Principles and Methods , 1998, Data Knowl. Eng..

[19]  M. Hudson,et al.  The CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance , 2020, Data Sci. J..

[20]  笠間 慎太郎,et al.  Google Books Ngram Viewerの歯科領域への応用 : 検索用語から時代の変遷を読む , 2016 .

[21]  M. Caprioli,et al.  What is the REFI-QDA Standard: Experimenting With the Transfer of Analyzed Research Projects Between QDA Software , 2020 .

[22]  Kalpana Shankar,et al.  Data sharing in the sciences , 2011, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..