Scholarly Journals – Page 12

"Advancing Software Citation Implementation (Software Citation Workshop 2022)"

Software is foundationally important to scientific and social progress, however, traditional acknowledgment of the use of others’ work has not adapted in step with the rapid development and use of software in research. This report outlines a series of collaborative discussions that brought together an international group of stakeholders and experts representing many communities, forms of labor, and expertise. Participants addressed specific challenges about software citation that have so far gone unresolved. The discussions took place in summer 2022 both online and in-person and involved a total of 51 participants. The activities described in this paper were intended to identify and prioritize specific software citation problems, develop (potential) interventions, and lay out a series of mutually supporting approaches to address them. The outcomes of this report will be useful for the GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums) community, repository managers and curators, research software developers, and publishers.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.07500v1

"Guest Post – Article Processing Charges are a Heavy Burden for Middle-Income Countries"

Perhaps recognizing that publication costs could be a barrier toward inclusive publishing, Plan S includes a provision that the journal/platform must provide APC waivers for authors from low-income economies and discounts for authors from lower middle-income economies. This policy is based on World Bank classifications of national economies and is adopted by companies such as Springer Nature (including Nature Portfolio and BMC journals) and Taylor & Francis. It sounds good in principle, but in practice is very limited . . . It is easy to see that many (if not most) countries widely recognized as developing, in which research investments are significantly lower than in the US or most of Europe, are not included by this waiver and discount recommendation. Indeed, no Latin American country qualifies for full APC waivers, since all are technically at least lower middle-income economies; only a handful qualify for partial discounts.

bit.ly/420W4Df

"Evaluating the Ability of Open-Source Artificial Intelligence to Predict Accepting-Journal Impact Factor and Eigenfactor Score Using Academic Article Abstracts: Cross-sectional Machine Learning Analysis"

Objective:

We sought to evaluate the performance of open-source artificial intelligence to predict the impact factor or Eigenfactor score tertile using academic article abstracts.

Methods:

PubMed-indexed articles published between 2016 and 2021 were identified with the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms "ophthalmology," "radiology," and "neurology." Journals, titles, abstracts, author lists, and MeSH terms were collected. Journal impact factor and Eigenfactor scores were sourced from the 2020 Clarivate Journal Citation Report. The journals included in the study were allocated percentile ranks based on impact factor and Eigenfactor scores, compared with other journals that released publications in the same year. All abstracts were preprocessed, which included the removal of the abstract structure, and combined with titles, authors, and MeSH terms as a single input. The input data underwent preprocessing with the inbuilt ktrain Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) preprocessing library before analysis with BERT. Before use for logistic regression and XGBoost models, the input data underwent punctuation removal, negation detection, stemming, and conversion into a term frequency-inverse document frequency array. Following this preprocessing, data were randomly split into training and testing data sets with a 3:1 train:test ratio. Models were developed to predict whether a given article would be published in a first, second, or third tertile journal (0-33rd centile, 34th-66th centile, or 67th-100th centile), as ranked either by impact factor or Eigenfactor score. BERT, XGBoost, and logistic regression models were developed on the training data set before evaluation on the hold-out test data set. The primary outcome was overall classification accuracy for the best-performing model in the prediction of accepting journal impact factor tertile.

Results:

There were 10,813 articles from 382 unique journals. The median impact factor and Eigenfactor score were 2.117 (IQR 1.102-2.622) and 0.00247 (IQR 0.00105-0.03), respectively. The BERT model achieved the highest impact factor tertile classification accuracy of 75.0%, followed by an accuracy of 71.6% for XGBoost and 65.4% for logistic regression. Similarly, BERT achieved the highest Eigenfactor score tertile classification accuracy of 73.6%, followed by an accuracy of 71.8% for XGBoost and 65.3% for logistic regression.

Conclusions:

Open-source artificial intelligence can predict the impact factor and Eigenfactor score of accepting peer-reviewed journals. Further studies are required to examine the effect on publication success and the time-to-publication of such recommender systems.

https://doi.org/10.2196/42789

"PreprintMatch: A Tool for Preprint to Publication Detection Shows Global Inequities in Scientific Publication"

Preprints, versions of scientific manuscripts that precede peer review, are growing in popularity. They offer an opportunity to democratize and accelerate research, as they have no publication costs or a lengthy peer review process. Preprints are often later published in peer-reviewed venues, but these publications and the original preprints are frequently not linked in any way. To this end, we developed a tool, PreprintMatch, to find matches between preprints and their corresponding published papers, if they exist. This tool outperforms existing techniques to match preprints and papers, both on matching performance and speed. PreprintMatch was applied to search for matches between preprints (from bioRxiv and medRxiv), and PubMed. The preliminary nature of preprints offers a unique perspective into scientific projects at a relatively early stage, and with better matching between preprint and paper, we explored questions related to research inequity. We found that preprints from low income countries are published as peer-reviewed papers at a lower rate than high income countries (39.6% and 61.1%, respectively), and our data is consistent with previous work that cite a lack of resources, lack of stability, and policy choices to explain this discrepancy. Preprints from low income countries were also found to be published quicker (178 vs 203 days) and with less title, abstract, and author similarity to the published version compared to high income countries. Low income countries add more authors from the preprint to the published version than high income countries (0.42 authors vs 0.32, respectively), a practice that is significantly more frequent in China compared to similar countries. Finally, we find that some publishers publish work with authors from lower income countries more frequently than others.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281659

"Revisiting Methodology for Identifying Open Access Advantages"

This study revisited the methodology for identifying the effects of open access and revealed the causes for contradictory conclusions using four indices for journals that transitioned from subscription to open access. . . . Although the aggregated data of the eight journals indicated that open access had a positive effect, the effect varied across journals. A few journals produced different results between the two citation scores as well as between citation scores and number of citations or articles. Furthermore, a publisher’s choice of which journal to shift to open access influenced their performance after the shift.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-023-09946-0

"Twenty Years of Wikipedia in Scholarly Publications: A Bibliometric Network Analysis of the Thematic and Citation Landscape"

Results also show that the author collaboration network is very sparsely connected, indicating the absence of close collaboration among the authors in the field. Furthermore, results reveal that the Wikipedia research institutions’ collaboration network reflects a North–South divide as very limited cooperation occurs between developed and developing countries’ institutions. Finally, the multiple correspondence analysis applied to obtain the Wikipedia research conceptual map reveals the breadth, diversity, and intellectual thrust of the Wikipedia’s scholarly publications.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01626-7

"Lack of Sustainability Plans for Preprint Services Risks Their Potential to Improve Science"

Despite successfully building a revenue model that shares the burden between Cornell University, the Simons Foundation and several members and supporters, arXiv’s “funding is still outpaced by [their] growth” – the server hosts over 2 million preprints already and is growing by 10% each year. And while arXiv has been supporting more and more scholars to share and discover preprints, the team behind it has been through significant changes in leadership and is dealing with the urgent need to modernize their 30-year-old technology. As a former Executive Director of arXiv noted, “[arXiv’s success] may not last forever”. Similarly, the recent news that Chan Zuckerberg Initiative has renewed its financial support for the leading preprint servers in biology and medicine, bioRxiv and medRxiv is welcome relief, but this support is temporary, and the team must find a way to continue in the long run.

bit.ly/3y745Ji

Bye, Bye Big Deal: "Indispensable or Unnecessary?: A Data-Driven Appraisal of Post-cancellation Access Rights"

When breaking out of ‘big deals’, some libraries and consortia have found that they can save money by negotiating away post-cancellation access (PCA) to subscribed resources after the subscription concludes. Using subscription data regarding major publisher contracts at several US research libraries, this article reviews options around PCA for libraries and presents a model for assigning a value to PCA content when negotiating a renewal contract.

https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.601

"China and Open Access"

In December 2022, the International Association of STM Publishers and the China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) released a report: Open Access Publishing in China. The report is openly available in both English and Chinese. This interview with Mark Robertson, consultant to the STM Association on the project, highlights the findings of the report and their implications for the scholarly publishing industry as well as providing background on the STM/CAST collaboration.

bit.ly/3kHUuW5

Paywall: "An Investigation of Gold Open Access Publications of STEM Faculty at a Public University in the United States"

This study investigated Gold Open Access journal publication by science and engineering faculty at the authors’ university from 2013 to 2022. Specifically, did Gold Open Access (OA) by these faculty increase, and did the publication rate vary between disciplines? The authors found that Gold OA publication increased by 176% over the past 10 years, and that an important factor was the Libraries’ creation of an Open Access Publishing Fund in 2017.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2023.2175103

"Changes in the Absolute Numbers and Proportions of Open Access Articles from 2000 to 2021 Based on the Web of Science Core Collection: A Bibliometric Study"

Purpose:

The ultimate goal of current open access (OA) initiatives is for library services to use OA resources. This study aimed to assess the infrastructure for OA scholarly information services by tabulating the number and proportion of OA articles in a literature database.

Method:

We measured the absolute numbers and proportions of OA articles at different time points across various disciplines based on the Web of Science (WoS) database.

Results:

The number (proportion) of available OA articles between 2000 and 2021 in the WoS database was 12 million (32.4%). The number (proportion) of indexed OA articles in 1 year was 0.15 million (14.6%) in 2000 and 1.5 million (48.0%) in 2021. The proportion of OA by subject categories in the cumulative data was the highest in the multidisciplinary category (2000–2021, 79%; 2021, 89%), high in natural sciences (2000–2021, 21%–46%; 2021, 41%–62%) and health and medicine (2000–2021, 37%–40%; 2021, 52%–60%), and low in social sciences and others (2000–2021, 23%–32%; 2021, 36%–44%), engineering (2000–2021, 17%–33%; 2021, 31%–39%) and humanities and arts (2000–2021, 11%–22%; 2021, 28%–38%).

Conclusion:

Our study confirmed that increasingly many OA research papers have been published in the last 20 years, and the recent data show considerable promise for better services in the future. The proportions of OA articles differed among scholarly disciplines, and designing library services necessitates several considerations with regard to the customers’ demands, available OA resources, and strategic approaches to encourage the use of scholarly OA articles.

https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.296

"Librarians and Academic Libraries’ Role in Promoting Open Access: What Needs to Change? "

Profound changes due to Open-Access (OA) publications lead to organizational changes in universities and libraries. This study examined Israeli librarians’ perceptions regarding their role and the academic library’s role in promoting OA-publication, including the barriers, challenges, needs and requirements necessary to promote OA publishing. Lack of a budget for OA-agreements and cooperation with university management, and researchers’ unawareness of OA were among the most prominent barriers. Librarians see great importance in their role of advising researchers regarding OA. However, they insisted on a regulated OA-policy at the national and institutional levels, which would strengthen their status as change-leaders of the OA-movement.

https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/shqnv

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Benefits of Open Access (OA) to Researchers from Lower-Income Countries: Tracing Evidence through an Analysis of Reference Patterns"

Making scientific literature freely available to everyone is a main objective of the open access (OA) movement. This may be of particular importance to researchers in lower-income countries, where access to literature is often hindered by high subscription costs. This study addresses this issue by analyzing reference lists of the world’s output of scientific publications over time. The core issues addressed include whether researchers from lower-income countries refer to fewer previous publications when they publish and how this pattern develops over time. Moreover, whether researchers from lower-income countries rely more on literature that is openly available through different OA routes than other researchers is explored. The study shows that the proportion of OA references increases over time for all publications and country groups. However, the main finding is that publications from lower-income countries have a higher growth rate of OA references. This suggests that an increase in OA publishing has been particularly beneficial to researchers in lower-income countries.

https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/ecgzh

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"How and Why Do Researchers Reference Data? A Study of Rhetorical Features and Functions of Data References in Academic Articles"

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.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.08477

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Penn State: "University Libraries Expands Open Access Support via 3 New BTAA [Big 10] Agreements"

The agreements with Wiley, Institute of Physics (IOP) and Microbiology Society cover OA publishing charges for Penn State corresponding authors publishing in these publishers’ journals. Those qualified articles will be immediately open access on the publisher’s platform. These publishers will offer a choice of open access licenses to Penn State authors publishing in their journals. Authors retain copyright in their articles.

The agreements run for three years from Jan. 1, 2023, to Dec. 31, 2025. In general, articles will need to be accepted during the agreements’ timeframe. The agreements also cover subscriptions and read access to Wiley, Institute of Physics (IOP) and Microbiology Society journals. Unlimited open access publishing is included with no additional cost to individual Penn State authors.

bit.ly/3Sjx9Xa

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

2.6 Billion Total Downloads: arXiv Annual Report 2022

Our critical priorities during 2022 were to secure additional funding, hire technical and program directors, and ramp up our efforts to modernize arXiv’s software by moving it to the cloud, which will provide better stability, scalability and maintainability. I’m pleased to report that we were able to make significant progress on all of these fronts. arXiv brought in more funding than expected in the form of grants, memberships, and donations, and we hired Stephanie Orphan as program director and Charles Frankston as technical director. Both bring strong and complementary expertise to the team. Moving the technical operations of arXiv—a service with a 30 year history—off of Cornell’s on-premises servers is a major, complicated task. The move to the cloud is currently in progress and on track

bit.ly/41exRsX

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Can an Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Be the Author of a Scholarly Article?"

At the end of 2022, the appearance of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot with amazing writing ability, caused a great sensation in academia. The chatbot turned out to be very capable, but also capable of deception, and the news broke that several researchers had listed the chatbot (including its earlier version) as co-authors of their academic papers. In response, Nature and Science expressed their position that this chatbot cannot be listed as an author in the papers they publish. Since an AI chatbot is not a human being, in the current legal system, the text automatically generated by an AI chatbot cannot be a copyrighted work; thus, an AI chatbot cannot be an author of a copyrighted work. Current AI chatbots such as ChatGPT are much more advanced than search engines in that they produce original text, but they still remain at the level of a search engine in that they cannot take responsibility for their writing. For this reason, they also cannot be authors from the perspective of research ethics.

https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.292

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"How Open Access Diamond Journals Comply with Industry Standards Exemplified by Plan S Technical Requirements"

Purpose:

This study investigated how well current open access (OA) diamond journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and a survey conform to Plan S requirements, including licenses, peer review, author copyright, unique article identifiers, digital archiving, and machine-readable licenses.

Method:

Data obtained from DOAJ journals and surveyed journals from mid-June to mid-July 2020 were analyzed for a variety of Plan S requirements. The results were presented using descriptive statistics.

Results:

Out of 1,465 journals that answered, 1,137 (77.0%) reported compliance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles. The peer review types used by OA diamond journals were double-blind (6,339), blind (2,070), peer review (not otherwise specified, 1,879), open peer review (42), and editorial review (118) out of 10,449 DOAJ journals. An author copyright retention policy was adopted by 5,090 out of 10,448 OA diamond journals (48.7%) in DOAJ. Of the unique article identifiers, 5,702 (54.6%) were digital object identifiers, 58 (0.6%) were handles, and 14 (0.1%) were uniform resource names, while 4,675 (44.7%) used none. Out of 1,619 surveyed journals, the archiving solutions were national libraries (n=170, 10.5%), Portico (n=67, 4.1%), PubMed Central (n=15, 0.9%), PKP PN (n=91, 5.6%), LOCKSS (n=136, 8.4%), CLOCKSS (n=87, 5.4%), the National Computing Center for Higher Education (n=6, 0.3%), others (n=69, 4.3%), no policy (n=855, 52.8%), and no reply (n=123, 7.6%). Article-level metadata deposition was done by 8,145 out of 10,449 OA diamond journals (78.0%) in DOAJ.

Conclusion:

OA diamond journals’ compliance with industry standards exemplified by the Plan S technical requirements was insufficient, except for the peer review type.

https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.295

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Impact and Perceived Value of the Revolutionary Advent of Artificial Intelligence in Research and Publishing among Researchers: A Survey-Based Descriptive Study"

Purpose:

This study was conducted to understand the perceptions and awareness of artificial intelligence (AI) in the academic publishing landscape.

Method:

We conducted a global survey entitled "Role and impact of AI on the future of academic publishing" to understand the impact of the AI wave in the scholarly publishing domain. This English-language survey was open to all researchers, authors, editors, publishers, and other stakeholders in the scholarly community. Conducted between August and October 2021, the survey received responses from around 212 universities across 54 countries.

Results:

Out of 365 respondents, about 93% belonged to the age groups of 18–34 and 35–54 years. While 50% of the respondents selected plagiarism detection as the most widely known AI-based application, image recognition (42%), data analytics (40%), and language enhancement (39%) were some other known applications of AI. The respondents also expressed the opinion that the academic publishing landscape will significantly benefit from AI. However, the major challenges restraining the large-scale adoption of AI, as expressed by 93% of the respondents, were limited knowledge and expertise, as well as difficulties in integrating AI-based solutions into existing IT infrastructure.

Conclusion:

The survey responses reflected the necessity of AI in research and publishing. This study suggests possible ways to support a smooth transition. This can be best achieved by educating and creating awareness to ease possible fears and hesitation, and to actualize the promising benefits of AI.

https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.294

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Guest Post — Scholarly Publishing as a Global Endeavor: Leveraging Open Source Software for Bibliodiversity "

The headline numbers for OJS [Open Journal Systems] in 2021 indicate that 1.46m articles were published by 34,071 active journals on approximately 12,000 publisher and institutional installations. To give context to these numbers, Elsevier’s portfolio published ~600,000 articles in ~2,700 journals in the same year. These past few years have seen a significant acceleration in the proliferation of the number of journals and the number of articles published on open source software.

bit.ly/3XAvduC

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Wiley Extends Open Access Agreement with Big Ten Academic Alliance "

Wiley, one of the world’s largest publishers and a global leader in research and education, today announced a three-year extension of its landmark open publishing agreement with the libraries of the Big Ten Academic Alliance, which serve universities across the midwestern and eastern United States.

This landmark agreement is "all open access," with no fees to Big Ten Academic Alliance faculty and researchers for publishing in all journals under the Wiley umbrella, including Hindawi’s gold open access portfolio. The agreement, active as of January 1, 2023, grants 14 participating flagship universities and 17 affiliated campuses access to read and publish in Wiley’s full portfolio of journals. Lead authors at all campuses covered by the agreement can publish their articles as open access, ensuring that their research will be immediately open and available to the public and that they will retain rights in their own work.

bit.ly/3Eaov7G

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Digging into shift+OPEN: A Conversation with MIT Press"

Supported by a gift from the Arcadia Fund, shift+OPEN will provide a platform for subscription journals that wish to move to a diamond (i.e., institutionally subsidized, with no reader or author fees) open-access (OA) publishing model. . . . [Nick Lindsay] We have enough support to underwrite a modest-sized journal that is publishing on a quarterly basis and has a traditional set up. There’s a range of possibilities that we can consider inside those parameters and we plan to examine the operations of the selected journal very closely to make sure that it can reasonably fit within our financial constraints.

bit.ly/3Yv6Kbn

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Open Access: A Journey from Impossible to Probable, but Still Uncertain"

An overview of the evolution of open access (OA) to scientific publications over the last 20 years is presented. This retrospective look allows us to make two observations that seem to overlap: on the one hand, how close the initial objective seems to be to what initially seemed utopian and, on the other, the unanticipated and solid obstacles that open access has encountered along the way, as well as the unexpected and diverse solutions that are emerging to overcome them. The overall assessment of OA is positive, and it underscores that open access is (or is becoming) possible, that it is good, and that it is necessary. However, this overall positive evolution has come up against two major obstacles that are slowing its progress: the double payments generated by hybrid journals (subscription and article processing charges [APCs]) and the unchecked growth in APCs. In addition, this intensive use of APCs is creating a publishing gap between publishers that charge fees to authors and those that do not, and ultimately, it is causing dissension regarding the (previously shared) strategy toward open access. There are no immediate, one-off solutions to overcome the aforementioned dysfunctions, although three actions that, in the medium term, can remedy them can be mentioned: changing the approach to the evaluation of science, adopting measures to regulate APCs, and promoting alternative publication models. Finally, it should be noted that OA has acted as the vanguard and spearhead of a broader movement: that of open science.

https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2023.ene.13

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Are Papers Published in Predatory Journals Worthless? A Geopolitical Dimension Revealed by Content-Based Analysis of Citations"

This study uses content-based citation analysis to move beyond the simplified classification of predatory journals. We present that, when we analyze papers not only in terms of the quantity of their citations but also the content of these citations, we are able to show the various roles played by papers published in journals accused of being predatory. To accomplish this, we analyzed the content of 9,995 citances (i.e., citation sentences) from 6,706 papers indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection, which cites papers published in so-called "predatory" (or questionable) journals. The analysis revealed that the vast majority of such citances are neutral (97.3%), and negative citations of articles published in the analyzed journals are almost completely nonexistent (0.8%). Moreover, the analysis revealed that the most frequently mentioned countries in the citances are India, Pakistan, and Iran, with mentions of Western countries being rare. This highlights a geopolitical bias and shows the usefulness of looking at such journals as mislocated centers of scholarly communication. The analyzed journals provide regional data prevalent for mainstream scholarly discussions, and the idea of predatory publishing hides geopolitical inequalities in global scholarly publishing. Our findings also contribute to the further development of content-based citation analysis.

https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00242

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Data Sharing and Reuse Practices: Disciplinary Differences and Improvements Needed"

This study investigates differences and commonalities in data production, sharing and reuse across the widest range of disciplines yet and identifies types of improvements needed to promote data sharing and reuse. . . .From the 3,257 survey responses, data sharing and reuse are still increasing but not ubiquitous in any subject area and are more common among experienced researchers.

https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2021-0423

| Research Data Publication and Citation Bibliography | Research Data Sharing and Reuse Bibliography | Research Data Curation and Management Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |