The Missing Data - The Relationship Between Legal Requirements and Open Research Data
Researchers have to deal with many questions and doubts when it comes to the publication of research data. In particular regarding the presumed conflict between handling of research data and the issues of data privacy. The research presented here aims to investigate this conflict and to identify and test solutions, talking into account both differences between disciplines and between cultural perspectives. The poster provides an overview of the various barriers to the publication of research data collected through guided interviews with researchers with different levels of scientific experience. To consider differences between disciplines, researchers in learning analytics, medicine and climate impact research were interviewed. The different legal regulations and cultural factors are compared between Germany, Peru, India and China.
Click on the poster image to enlarge
I am looking forward to a lively exchange on the topic and possible support in conducting the upcoming surveys. The results of my research will be of interest for several WGs.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 Biernacka_RDA_Poster.pdf | 190.73 KB |
- Log in to post comments
- 5896 reads
Author: Shanmugasundara...
Date: 01 Apr, 2020
Hi Katarzyna,
this is an interesting topic and nice to see someone researching this. You state in your preliminary findings "mostly competition and no visible added value". Do you have any ideas for solutions to show that there is added value in open research data?
Thank you,
Venkat
Author: Katarzyna Biernacka
Date: 02 Apr, 2020
Hi Venkat,
thank you very much for your comment and your question.
Competition and Non-visible value are the findings for medicine and climate impact research in Germany - not in general, just to make it clear. This is relevant, since the way of handling of research data is very community driven.
The question is how to convince scientists that the publication of data is of great value? Well, there are different approaches in my opinion:
1) Adaptation of the system: increasing the value of publication or citation of data would be a great help. If not only the publication of scientific articles would contribute to the reputation, but also providing high-quality data - so the effort involved in the RDM is also rewarded.
2) Appreciation through funding: if funders were to explicitly and sufficiently provide money for RDM with a focus on the publication of research data, it would make the importance of the topic clearer to the scientists.
3) Create awarness: in many cases, it helps to talk to the scientists and show them how the publication of their research data leads to transparency of their whole research process. And not only that, you can show them the many opportunities for collaboration and point out the greater dissemination and visibility of their research project.
These are only my first thoughts on this. After the online survey, when we have enough data to validate the findings, we will try to find and implement solutions. So, if you are interested in the results, you can keep an eye on the HEADT Centre website or follow me on Twitter.
Best,
Katarzyna
Author: Asahiko Matsuda
Date: 08 Apr, 2020
The legal issue that we encountered in trying to embrace open data science was more about export control. Many countries prohibit export of not only goods but also software, technology, and data of certain categories to certain countries. In such cases, each researcher bears responsibility to make sure that the data they are releasing is legally okay, but such consideration is often a legally complicated matter beyond the researcher's capabilities. I believe it is a noteworthy portion of the researchers' "unfamiliarity with the legal regulations" that you mention.
(Comment edited for wording)
Author: Katarzyna Biernacka
Date: 08 Apr, 2020
Hi Asahiko,
thank you very much for your comment. This is a very interesting aspect. Thanks for pointing that out! As far as I know, the legal regulations mainly relate to the export of personal data to other countries. When data is published, it must be anonymised - in this way no personal data is exported. But you are right, it should be considered it in the evaluation too.
Best regards,
Katarzyna
Author: Asahiko Matsuda
Date: 09 Apr, 2020
Katarzyna,
What I was referring to was not about personal data, but rather, about export control regulations on certain kind of technologies that nations might categorize as potentially military purposes. But that category can be surprisingly broad! For instance, export of cryptography from the U.S. is restricted, even though in this day and age cryptographic technologies are indispensable for network communication. This has already caused lots of confusions in distribution of well-intentioned software. Another example, let's say a researcher developed a new type of metal that can withstand heat and pressure, intended for use in car engines. But would the researcher need to worry about the law that restricts export of "any data or technology that can be used for missiles"? (because the same metal can be used for missile engines too!) So, can the researcher make this data open or not? Being a materials research institute, we actually have been scratching our heads on these issues. When I saw the title of your poster, these issues were what came to my mind, so my comment is that it would be nice if that aspect can also be covered in your future work. Thank you for putting together the interviews in your poster, though, because it paints a clear picture of what are in the researchers' minds.
Best regards,
Asahiko Matsuda
Author: Katarzyna Biernacka
Date: 09 Apr, 2020
Dear Asahiko,
Thanks for clarifying. I'll definitely consider it in my future work. It is indeed an interesting and important point.
Best regards,
Katarzyna