An official website of the United States government
Expectations to share data underlying studies are increasing, but research on how participants, particularly those in qualitative research, respond to requests for data sharing is limited. We studied research participants’ willingness to, understanding of, and motivations for data sharing. As part of a larger qualitative study on abortion reporting, we conducted interviews with 64 cisgender women in two states in early 2020 and asked for consent to share de-identified data. At the end of interviews, we asked participants to reflect on their motivations for agreeing or declining to share their data. The vast majority of respondents consented to data sharing and reported that helping others was a primary motivation for agreeing to share their data. However, a substantial number of participants showed a limited understanding of the concept of “data sharing.” Additional research is needed on how to improve participants’ understanding of data sharing and thus ensure fully informed consent.
more »
« less
The Open Brain Consent: Informing research participants and obtaining consent to share brain imaging data
Abstract Having the means to share research data openly is essential to modern science. For human research, a key aspect in this endeavor is obtaining consent from participants, not just to take part in a study, which is a basic ethical principle, but also to share their data with the scientific community. To ensure that the participants' privacy is respected, national and/or supranational regulations and laws are in place. It is, however, not always clear to researchers what the implications of those are, nor how to comply with them. The Open Brain Consent (https://open-brain-consent.readthedocs.io) is an international initiative that aims to provide researchers in the brain imaging community with information about data sharing options and tools. We present here a short history of this project and its latest developments, and share pointers to consent forms, including a template consent form that is compliant with the EU general data protection regulation. We also share pointers to an associated data user agreement that is not only useful in the EU context, but also for any researchers dealing with personal (clinical) data elsewhere.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1912266
- PAR ID:
- 10449309
- Author(s) / Creator(s):
- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; more »
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Human Brain Mapping
- Volume:
- 42
- Issue:
- 7
- ISSN:
- 1065-9471
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 1945-1951
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Neuromorphic computing shows promise for advancing computing efficiency and capabilities of AI applications using brain-inspired principles. However, the neuromorphic research field currently lacks standardized benchmarks, making it difficult to accurately measure technological advancements, compare performance with conventional methods, and identify promising future research directions. This article presents NeuroBench, a benchmark framework for neuromorphic algorithms and systems, which is collaboratively designed from an open community of researchers across industry and academia. NeuroBench introduces a common set of tools and systematic methodology for inclusive benchmark measurement, delivering an objective reference framework for quantifying neuromorphic approaches in both hardware-independent and hardware-dependent settings. For latest project updates, visit the project website (neurobench.ai).more » « less
-
The EU ePrivacy Directive requires consent before using cookies or other tracking technologies, while the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) sets high-level and principle-based requirements for such consent to be valid. However, the translation of such requirements into concrete design interfaces for consent banners is far from straightforward. This situation has given rise to the use of manipulative tactics in user experience (“UX”), commonly known as dark patterns, which influence users’ decision-making and may violate the GDPR requirements for valid consent. To address this problem, EU regulators aim to interpret GDPR requirements and to limit the design space of consent banners within their guidelines. Academic researchers from various disciplines address the same problem by performing user studies to evaluate the impact of design and dark patterns on users’ decision making. Regrettably, the guidelines and user studies rarely impact each other. In this Essay, we collected and analyzed seventeen official guidelines issued by EU regulators and the EU Data Protection Board (“EDPB”), as well as eleven consent-focused empirical user studies which we thoroughly studied from a User Interface (“UI”) design perspective. We identified numerous gaps between consent banner designs recommended by regulators and those evaluated in user studies. By doing so, we contribute to both the regulatory discourse and future user studies. We pinpoint EU regulatory inconsistencies and provide actionable recommendations for regulators. For academic scholars, we synthesize insights on design elements discussed by regulators requiring further user study evaluations. Finally, we recommend that EDPB and EU regulators, alongside usability, Human-Computer Interaction (“HCI”), and design researchers, engage in transdisciplinary dialogue in order to close the gap between EU guidelines and user studies.more » « less
-
Abstract It has become common for researchers to make their data publicly available to meet the data management and accessibility requirements of funding agencies and scientific publishers. However, many researchers face the challenge of determining what data to preserve and share and where to preserve and share those data. This can be especially challenging for those who run dynamical models, which can produce complex, voluminous data outputs, and have not considered what outputs may need to be preserved and shared as part of the project design. This manuscript presents findings from the NSF EarthCube Research Coordination Network project titled “What About Model Data? Best Practices for Preservation and Replicability” (https://modeldatarcn.github.io/). These findings suggest that if the primary goal of sharing data are to communicate knowledge, most simulation-based research projects only need to preserve and share selected model outputs along with the full simulation experiment workflow. One major result of this project has been the development of a rubric, designed to provide guidance for making decisions on what simulation output needs to be preserved and shared in trusted community repositories to achieve the goal of knowledge communication. This rubric, along with use cases for selected projects, provide scientists with guidance on data accessibility requirements in the planning process of research, allowing for more thoughtful development of data management plans and funding requests. Additionally, this rubric can be referred to by publishers for what is expected in terms of data accessibility for publication.more » « less
-
Abstract Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors:www.dpjedi.org) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing (www.dpjedi.org/resources). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide:https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hstcx).more » « less
