Researchers' attitudes and perceptions towards data sharing and data reuse in the field of food science and technology

This work analyses the perception and practice of sharing, reusing, and facilitating access to research data in the field of food science and technology. The study involved the coordination of a focus group discussion and an online survey, to understand and evince the behaviour of researchers regarding data management in that field. Both the discussion group and the survey were performed with researchers from several institutes of the Spanish National Research Council. The lack of a data sharing culture, the fear of being scooped, and confusion between the concepts of the working plan and the data management plan were some of the issues that emerged in the focus group. Respondents' previous experience with sharing their research data has been mainly in the form of appendices to peer‐reviewed publications. From the survey (101 responses), the most important motivations for publishing research data were found to be facilitating the reproducibility of the research, increasing the likelihood of citations of the article, and compliance with funding body mandates. Legal constraints, intellectual property, data ownership, data rights, potential commercial exploitation, and misuse of data were the main barriers to publishing data as open data. Citation in publications, certification, compliance with standards, and the reputation of the data providers were the most relevant factors affecting the use of other researchers' data. Being recent or recently updated, well documented, with quality metadata and ease of access were the most valued attributes of open research data.

[1]  A. Treloar,et al.  Open Data in Global Environmental Research: The Belmont Forum’s Open Data Survey , 2016, PloS one.

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

[3]  Sascha Friesike,et al.  A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data , 2017, Palgrave Communications.

[4]  E. Welch,et al.  Building Global Genomics Initiatives and Enabling Data Sharing: Insights from Multiple Case Studies. , 2018, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[5]  S. Rijcke,et al.  Open Data: the researcher perspective - survey and case studies , 2017 .

[6]  Sascha Friesike,et al.  A Reputation Economy: Results from an Empirical Survey on Academic Data Sharing , 2015, ArXiv.

[7]  J. Grefenstette,et al.  A systematic review of barriers to data sharing in public health , 2014, BMC Public Health.

[8]  Heather A. Piwowar,et al.  Who Shares? Who Doesn't? Factors Associated with Openly Archiving Raw Research Data , 2011, PloS one.

[9]  Iain Hrynaszkiewicz,et al.  Whitepaper: Practical challenges for researchers in data sharing , 2018 .

[10]  Wolfgang Zenk-Möltgen,et al.  Factors influencing the data sharing behavior of researchers in sociology and political science , 2018, J. Documentation.

[11]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Attitudes and norms affecting scientists’ data reuse , 2017, PloS one.

[12]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Open Data : The researcher perspective , 2017 .

[13]  C. Wiley.  Data Sharing and Engineering Faculty: An Analysis of Selected Publications , 2018, Science & Technology Libraries.

[14]  Mark John Costello.  Motivating Online Publication of Data , 2009 .

[15]  C. Tenopir,et al.  Research Data Sharing: Practices and Attitudes of Geophysicists , 2018, Earth and Space Science.

[16]  G. Franck.  Open access , 2012, Cell cycle.

[17]  C. Borgman,et al.  If We Share Data, Will Anyone Use Them? Data Sharing and Reuse in the Long Tail of Science and Technology , 2013, PloS one.

[18]  M. Lawn.  A European Research Area? , 2002 .

[19]  William K. Michener,et al.  Ecological data sharing , 2015, Ecol. Informatics.

[20]  Elizabeth D. Dalton,et al.  Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide , 2015, PloS one.

[21]  C. Tenopir,et al.  Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and Perceptions , 2011, PloS one.