Loading wiki pages...

Wiki Version:
<p>This pilot of the PresQT Needs assessment and May 1, 2017 talk <a href="https://osf.io/q8p9r/" rel="nofollow" title="Landscape of Questioning about Data and Software Preservation">Landscape of Questioning about Data and Software Preservation</a> combine to offer an overview of the landscape of questioning about data and software sharing and a preview of the planned PresQT assessment. Approaches of select past data sharing surveys are presented in the talk along with an overview of results and comparison of findings from those surveys.</p> <p>The PresQT project is committed to conduct a questionnaire based survey as part of stakeholder engagement to gauge community priorities and expand our outreach. A questionnaire was administered through Qualtrics, a survey tool, to workshop attendees on May 1, 2017 and the assessment will later be rolled out to a wider audience of potential domestic and international respondents, including the 20,000 users who are part of the Science Gateway Institute’s client base. The PresQT Survey response data will be aggregated, analyzed and made available on the PresQT project website and inform discussion during workshops especially related to feature prioritization.</p> <p>The aforementioned PresQT survey occupies a unique and complementary position among several recent related surveys which have addressed issues surrounding data and/or software sharing but not specifically preservation. We will look at the results from past surveys like the recent <em>Open Data The Researcher Perspective</em> <a href="https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/research-data/open-data-report" rel="nofollow">https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/research-data/open-data-report</a> (April 2017)<a href="https://osf.io/q8p9r/" rel="nofollow" title="Landscape of Questioning about Data and Software Preservation">1</a> by Elsevier and the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), part of Leiden University, the Netherlands. The study had a complementary methods approach consisting of a quantitative analysis of bibliometric and publication data, a global survey of 1,200 researchers and three case studies in the fields of soil science, human genetics and digital humanities. <br></p> <p>Other studies of interest which will be discussed are: a)American Physical Society <em>Open Data</em> (forthcoming) b) <em>The State of Open Data Report</em> <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4036398.v1" rel="nofollow">https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4036398.v1</a> (2016)<a href="https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3468368.v2" rel="nofollow">2</a> , a survey run by Springer Nature in association with Figshare and Digital Science on awareness and use of open data. c) <em>Science gateways today and tomorrow: positive perspectives of nearly 5000 members of the research community</em> <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3526" rel="nofollow">http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3526</a> (2015)<a href="https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3468368.v2" rel="nofollow">3</a> , and d) <em>Wiley Researcher Data Insights Survey</em> (2014).<a href="http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/110982" rel="nofollow">5</a></p> <p>This talk aims to help workshop attendees better understand stakeholders’ self-reported behavior and findings to-date, as well as to seek input from workshop participants during discussion period on how PresQT will most benefit from the anticipated PresQT needs analysis and its findings.</p> <hr> <p><a href="https://osf.io/q8p9r/" rel="nofollow" title="Landscape of Questioning about Data and Software Preservation">1</a> Berghmans, Stephane; Cousijn, Helena; Deakin, Gemma; Meijer, Ingeborg; Mulligan, Adrian; Plume, Andrew; de Rijcke, Sarah; Rushforth, Alex; Tatum, Clifford; van Leeuwen, Thed; Waltman, Ludo (2017), “Open Data: the researcher perspective - survey and case studies”. Mendeley Data, v1 <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/bwrnfb4bvh.1" rel="nofollow">http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/bwrnfb4bvh.1</a></p> <p><a href="https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3468368.v2" rel="nofollow">2</a> Treadway, Jon; Hahnel, Mark; Leonelli, Sabina; Penny, Dan; Groenewegen, David; Miyairi, Nobuko; Hayashi, Kazuhiro; O'Donnell, Daniel; Science, Digital; Hook, Daniel (2016): “The State of Open Data Report”. figshare. <a href="https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4036398.v1" rel="nofollow">https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4036398.v1</a></p> <p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/bwrnfb4bvh.1" rel="nofollow">3</a> Lawrence, Katherine; Wilkins-Diehr, Nancy; Zentner, Michael; Wernert, Julie; Pierce, Marlon; Marru, Suresh; Michael, Scott; Hayden, Linda; McLennan, Michael; Stanzione, Dan; Dooley, Rion(2015-04-20) “Science Gateways Institute Survey”. <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/110982" rel="nofollow">http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/110982</a></p> <p><a href="https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4036398.v1" rel="nofollow">4</a> Lawrence, K. A., Zentner, M., Wilkins-Diehr, N., Wernert, J. A., Pierce, M., Marru, S., and Michael, S. (2015) Science gateways today and tomorrow: positive perspectives of nearly 5000 members of the research community. Concurrency Computat.: Pract. Exper., 27: 4252–4268. doi: 10.1002/cpe.3526 <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3526" rel="nofollow">http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3526</a>.</p> <p><a href="http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/110982" rel="nofollow">5</a> Wiley. (2016) “Wiley Data Sharing Survey”. figshare. <a href="https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3468368.v2" rel="nofollow">https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3468368.v2</a></p>
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.