Search for: All records

ABSTRACT The goals of open science are driven by policies requiring data management, sharing, and accessibility. One way of measuring the impact of open science policies on scientific knowledge is to access data that has been prepared for re‐use. But how accessible/available are data resources? In this paper, we discuss a method for exploring and locating datasets made available by scientists from federally funded projects in the US. The data pathways method was tested on federal awards. Here we describe the method and the results from analyzing fifty federal awards granted by the National Science Foundation to pursue data resources and their availability in publications, data repositories, or institutional repositories. The data pathways approach contributes to the development of a practical approach on availability that captures the current ways in which data are accessible from federally funded science projects –ranging from institutional repositories, journal data deposit, PI and project web pages, and science data platforms, among other found possibilities. This paper discusses some background and motivations for such a method, the method, research design, barriers encountered when searching for data resources from projects, and how this method can be useful to future studies of data availability. 

Data management plans (DMPs) are required from researchers seeking funding from federal agencies in the United States. Ideally, DMPs disclose how research outputs will be managed and shared. How well DMPs communicate those plans is less understood. Evaluation tools such as the DART rubric and the Belmont scorecard assess the completeness of DMPs and offer one view into what DMPs communicate. This paper compares the evaluation criteria of the two tools by applying them to the same corpus of 150 DMPs from five different NSF programs. Findings suggest that the DART rubric and the Belmont score overlap significantly, but the Belmont scorecard provides a better method to assess completeness. We find that most DMPs fail to address many of the best practices that are articulated by librarians and information professionals in the different evaluation tools. However, the evaluation methodology of both tools relies on a rating scale that does not account for the interaction of key areas of data management. This work contributes to the improvement of evaluation tools for data management planning. 

What is the relationship between Data Management Plans (DMPs), DMP guidance documents, and the reality of end-of-project data preservation and access? In this short paper we report on some preliminary findings of a 3-year investigation into the impact of DMPs on federally funded science in the United States. We investigated a small sample of publicly accessible DMPs (N=14) published using DMPTool. We found that while DMPs followed the National Science Foundation's guidelines, the pathways to the resulting research data are often obscure, vague, or not obvious. We define two “data pathways” as the search tactics and strategies deployed in order to find datasets. 

This poster reports on ongoing research into the National Science Foundation’s Data Management Plan guidelines and its impact on science data lifecycles. We ask two research questions (RQs): 1) How does guidance about the formulation of DMPs vary across different research areas? And 2) How has guidance about the management of data changed since the first DMP policies were published in 2011? To this end, we collected, examined, and compared 37 DMP guidance policies from 15 different research areas. We identify the following three themes during document analysis: 1) Responsibility for the future of data; 2) Data maintenance changes over time; and 3) The use of data repositories. Based on these preliminary findings we believe that National Science Foundation guidance policies represent a unique view into changes in data management practices over the last decade.