Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas

<jats:p>Data reuse is a common practice in the social sciences. While published data play an essential role in the production of social science research, they are not consistently cited, which makes it difficult to assess their full scholarly impact and give credit to the original data producers. Furthermore, it can be challenging to understand researchers’ motivations for referencing data. Like references to academic literature, data references perform various rhetorical functions, such as paying homage, signaling disagreement, or drawing comparisons. This paper studies how and why researchers reference social science data in their academic writing. We develop a typology to model relationships between the entities that anchor data references, along with their features (access, actions, locations, styles, types) and functions (critique, describe, illustrate, interact, legitimize). We illustrate the use of the typology by coding multidisciplinary research articles (n = 30) referencing social science data archived at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). We show how our typology captures researchers’ interactions with data and purposes for referencing data. Our typology provides a systematic way to document and analyze researchers’ narratives about data use, extending our ability to give credit to data that support research.</jats:p>

<jats:p>The Committee on Data for Science and Technology of the International Council of Scientific Unions (CODATA) decided in February, 2001 to publish a new on-line peer reviewed journal, freely available to all. It would be called the Data Science Journal. The subsequent steps taken to launch this journal are described, leading to the publication of the first issue of 10 papers in April 2002 and of the first volume of 19 papers by December 2002. Some necessary corrections and improvements before the publication of a second volume of 19 papers in 2003 are also described.</jats:p>

<jats:p>The Horizon Europe project ISIDORe is dedicated to pandemic preparedness and responsiveness research. It brings together 17 research infrastructures (RIs) and networks to provide a broad range of services to infectious disease researchers. An efficient and structured treatment of data is central to ISIDORe’s aim to furnish seamless access to its multidisciplinary catalogue of services, and to ensure that users’ results are treated FAIRly. ISIDORe therefore requires a data management plan (DMP) covering both access management and research outputs, applicable over a broad range of disciplines, and compatible with the constraints and existing practices of its diverse partners. Here, we describe how, to achieve that aim, we undertook an iterative, step-by-step, process to build a community-approved living document, identifying good practices and processes, on the basis of use cases, presented as proof of concepts. International fora such as the RDA and EOSC, and primarily the BY-COVID project, furnished registries, tools and online data platforms, as well as standards, and the support of data scientists. Together, these elements provide a path for building an umbrella, FAIR-compliant DMP, aligned as fully as possible with FAIR principles, which could also be applied as a framework for data management harmonisation in other large-scale, challenge-driven projects. Finally, we discuss how data management and reuse can be further improved through the use of knowledge models when writing DMPs and, how, in the future, an inter-RI network of data stewards could contribute to the establishment of a community of practice, to be integrated subsequently into planned trans-RI competence centres.</jats:p>

<jats:p>At-risk data is an unfortunate research reality and can be present in all data formats in a range of research disciplines. This is defined as data that are at risk of loss due to various factors, including deterioration of the media, lack of accompanying documentation and data that exists in non-digital formats, which are often irreplaceable. Continued access to older data has a range of benefits. The factors that place valuable data at risk are therefore a cause for concern. This paper reports on a multi-method case study, comprising a survey and interviews. A web-based questionnaire was distributed to all research group leaders based at a leading South African research institute. This was followed by one-on-one interviews that were held with a sub-section of the same group of researchers. The combined findings of the two methods enabled a picture to be formed regarding factors that jeopardise research data, data rescue obstacles that the researchers encountered and the state of data rescue at the institute. Several recommendations and strategies are put forward to address identified risk factors and challenges. Suggestions include the launch of a data rescue project, awareness training around data at risk, involving the institute’s library and information services (LIS) section in data rescue and launching continued efforts to acquire a dedicated institutional data repository. It is also important to ensure that the scope of project risk management includes data considerations. The combined implementation of recommendations is anticipated to ensure the accessibility and usability of older at-risk data and reduce the chances of current and future data becoming compromised.</jats:p>

<jats:p>We studied 11 long-term data infrastructure projects, most of which focused on the Earth Sciences, to understand characteristics that contributed to their project sustainability. Among our sample group, we noted the existence of three different types of project groupings: Database, Framework, and Middleware. Most efforts started as federally funded research projects, and our results show that nearly all became organizations in order to become sustainable. Projects were often funded for short time scales but had the long-term burden of sustaining and supporting open science, interoperability, and community building–activities that are difficult to fund directly. This transition from ‘project’ to ‘organization’ was challenging for most efforts, especially in regard to leadership change and funding issues. Some common approaches to sustainability were identified within each project grouping. Framework and Database projects both relied heavily on the commitment to, and contribution from, a disciplinary community. Framework projects often used bottom-up governance approaches to maintain the active participation and interest of their community. Database projects succeeded when they were able to position themselves as part of the core workflow for disciplinary-specific scientific research. Middleware projects borrowed heavily from sustainability models used by software companies, while maintaining strong scientific partnerships. Cyberinfrastructure for science requires considerable resources to develop and sustain itself, and much of these resources are provided through in-kind support from academics, researchers, and their institutes. It is imperative that more work is done to find appropriate models that help sustain key data infrastructure for Earth Science over the long-term.</jats:p>