Social scientists' satisfaction with data reuse

Much of the recent research on digital data repositories has focused on assessing either the trustworthiness of the repository or quantifying the frequency of data reuse. Satisfaction with the data reuse experience, however, has not been widely studied. Drawing from the information systems and information science literature, we developed a model to examine the relationship between data quality and data reusers' satisfaction. Based on a survey of 1,480 journal article authors who cited Inter‐University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) data in published papers from 2008–2012, we found several data quality attributes—completeness, accessibility, ease of operation, and credibility—had significant positive associations with data reusers' satisfaction. There was also a significant positive relationship between documentation quality and data reusers' satisfaction.

[1]  Ixchel M. Faniel.  Unrealized Potential: The Socio-Technical Challenges of a Large Scale Cyberinfrastructure Initiative , 2009 .

[2]  Philip E. Bourne,et al.  Will a Biological Database Be Different from a Biological Journal? , 2005, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[3]  Ixchel M. Faniel,et al.  Reusing Scientific Data: How Earthquake Engineering Researchers Assess the Reusability of Colleagues’ Data , 2010, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[4]  Max Wilkinson.  Datacite: The International Data Citation Initiative: Datasets Programme , 2010 .

[5]  Sarah Whitcher Kansa,et al.  Publishing and Pushing: Mixing Models for Communicating Research Data in Archaeology , 2014, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[6]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[7]  Ben Anderson,et al.  What Are Data? The Many Kinds of Data and Their Implications for Data Re-Use , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[8]  Susanne Dobratz,et al.  The nestor Catalogue of Criteria for Trusted Digital Repository Evaluation and Certification , 2006, J. Digit. Inf..

[9]  Ann Zimmerman,et al.  Not by metadata alone: the use of diverse forms of knowledge to locate data for reuse , 2007, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[10]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Beyond Accuracy: What Data Quality Means to Data Consumers , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[11]  Andrew C. Simpson,et al.  Collaboration and Trust in Healthcare Innovation: The eDiaMoND Case Study , 2005, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[12]  N. House.  Digital libraries and practices of trust: Networked biodiversity information , 2002 .

[13]  R. Sitgreaves.  Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). , 1979 .

[14]  N. Roberts,et al.  Value-added processes in information systems , 1986 .

[15]  G. King,et al.  Ensuring the Data-Rich Future of the Social Sciences , 2011, Science.

[16]  Charles Oppenheim,et al.  Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences' literature , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[17]  Charlotte P. Lee,et al.  Beyond trust and reliability: reusing data in collaborative cancer epidemiology research , 2013, CSCW.

[18]  Elizabeth Yakel,et al.  The role of data reuse in the apprenticeship process , 2013, ASIST.

[19]  Kathleen Marie Fear,et al.  Measuring and Anticipating the Impact of Data Reuse. , 2013 .

[20]  Peter B. Seddon,et al.  A Partial Test and Development of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success , 1994, ICIS.

[21]  Wendy W. Chapman,et al.  Public sharing of research datasets: A pilot study of associations , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[22]  Soo Young Rieh,et al.  Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework , 2007, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

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

[24]  E. Anderson,et al.  The Antecedents and Consequences of Customer Satisfaction for Firms , 1993 .

[25]  Adam Worrall,et al.  Research project tasks, data, and perceptions of data quality in a condensed matter physics community , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Les Gasser,et al.  Information quality work organization in wikipedia , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[27]  Sanda Ionescu,et al.  Documenting the research life cycle: one data model, many products , 2010 .

[28]  Josefina J. Card,et al.  Broadening Public Access to Data through the Development of Tools for Data Novices , 2003 .

[29]  M. Larsen,et al.  The Psychology of Survey Response , 2002 .

[30]  Soo Young Rieh.  Judgement of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web , 2002 .

[31]  Peiling Wang,et al.  A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I. document selection , 1998 .

[32]  R. Gurrea,et al.  The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty , 2006, Inf. Manag..

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

[34]  Keen.  An Empirical Evaluation of User Information Satisfaction (UIS) Measures for Use with General Ledger Accounting Software I. Introduction , 2002 .

[35]  Kakuzo Iwamura,et al.  λ credibility , 2009 .

[36]  Carol L. Barry.  User-Defined Relevance Criteria: An Exploratory Study , 1994, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[37]  Elizabeth Yakel,et al.  The challenges of digging data: a study of context in archaeological data reuse , 2013, JCDL '13.

[38]  Soo Young Rieh.  Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[39]  W. DeSarbo,et al.  Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments , 1988 .

[40]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online , 2010 .

[41]  Pascal Heus,et al.  Data Documentation Initiative: Toward a Standard for the Social Sciences , 2008, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[42]  Brian Matthews,et al.  Enabling scientific data sharing and re-use , 2012, 2012 IEEE 8th International Conference on E-Science.

[43]  Peiling Wang,et al.  A Cognitive Model of Document Use During a Research Project. Study I. Document Selection , 1998, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[44]  Paul Benjamin Lowry,et al.  Partial Least Squares (PLS) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) for Building and Testing Behavioral Causal Theory: When to Choose It and How to Use It , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[45]  Adam Worrall,et al.  Studying the data practices of a scientific community , 2013, JCDL '13.

[46]  Martin Pilgram,et al.  Consultative Committee For Space Data Systems , 2009 .

[47]  Susan Davis Herring.  Using the World Wide Web for research: are faculty satisfied? , 2001 .

[48]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Indicators for the Data Usage Index (DUI): an incentive for publishing primary biodiversity data through global information infrastructure , 2011, BMC Bioinformatics.

[49]  S. Seyedaliakbar,et al.  An investigation into the determinants of customer satisfaction , 2016 .

[50]  N. Roberts,et al.  Second-hand knowledge: An inquiry into cognitive authority: P. Wilson. London: Greenwood Press, 1983. 210 pp. ISBN 0 313 23763 8. £28.95. , 1985 .

[51]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research , 2004, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[52]  Carina Lansing,et al.  Capturing and supporting contexts for scientific data sharing via the biological sciences collaboratory , 2004, CSCW.

[53]  R. Oliver.  Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective On The Consumer , 1996 .

[54]  Robert S. Taylor,et al.  Value-Added Processes in Information Systems , 1987 .

[55]  Elizabeth Yakel,et al.  Data reuse and sensemaking among novice social scientists , 2012, ASIST.

[56]  Tony Hey,et al.  The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery , 2009 .

[57]  Besiki Stvilia,et al.  Prioritization of data quality dimensions and skills requirements in genome annotation work , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[58]  Helena Karasti,et al.  Digital Data Practices and the Long Term Ecological Research Program Growing Global , 2008, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[59]  C. Chinyanga.  Using the World Wide Web for research , 2004 .

[60]  HartswoodMark,et al.  Collaboration and Trust in Healthcare Innovation , 2005 .

[61]  Peiling Wang,et al.  A Cognitive Model of Document Use During a Research Project. Study II. Decisions at the Reading and Citing Stages , 1999, Journal of the American Society for Information Science.

[62]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  The elements of computer credibility , 1999, CHI '99.

[63]  Thompson S. H. Teo,et al.  An empirical study of the performance impact of computerization in the retail industry , 1998 .

[64]  James C. Anderson,et al.  Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validities. , 1991 .

[65]  Martin J. Eppler.  Managing Information Quality , 2003 .

[66]  Jan Brase,et al.  DataCite - A Global Registration Agency for Research Data , 2009, 2009 Fourth International Conference on Cooperation and Promotion of Information Resources in Science and Technology.

[67]  Heather A. Piwowar,et al.  Data reuse and the open data citation advantage , 2013, PeerJ.

[68]  Jinfang Niu,et al.  Perceived documentation quality of social science data , 2009 .

[69]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  What makes Web sites credible?: a report on a large quantitative study , 2001, CHI.

[70]  Besiki Stvilia,et al.  A model for online consumer health information quality , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[71]  H. Russell Bernard,et al.  Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches , 2000 .

[72]  Mario Piattini,et al.  A proposal for a set of attributes relevant for Web portal data quality , 2008, Software Quality Journal.

[73]  John Kunze,et al.  DataONE: Data Observation Network for Earth - Preserving Data and Enabling Innovation in the Biological and Environmental Sciences , 2011, D Lib Mag..