Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Design a Research Data Management Platform? Technical, Organizational and Individual Perspectives and Their Relations

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Human Interface and the Management of Information. Interacting with Information (HCII 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 12185))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Academic research generates increasing amounts of data that needs to be shared between collaborators, made publicly accessible and/or archived for the long term, all while respecting applicable regulations on topics such as data protection. Good research data management (RDM) is challenging, and despite the growing number of available technical solutions, researchers have been reluctant to use them. We interviewed 64 academic researchers to elicit requirements and explore attitudes towards RDM. Although many funding bodies insist that each project follow published RDM guidelines, only about half the participants considered RDM relevant for their own work, and only one in three reported that they already practiced RDM or were planning to do so. The qualitative analysis of the transcripts revealed three broad categories of requirements for RDM platforms, namely technical, organizational and individual ones. We discuss how these requirements are related to, and sometimes contradict each other.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Whyte, A., Tedds, J.: Making the Case for Research Data Management. DCC Briefing Papers. Digital Curation Centre, Edinburgh (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Schopfel, J., Chaudiron, S., Jacquemin, B., Prost, H., Severo, M., Thiault, F.: Open access to research data in electronic theses and dissertations: an overview. Libr. Hi Tech. 32, 612–627 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-06-2014-0058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vines, T.H., et al.: The availability of research data declines rapidly with article age. Curr. Biol. 24, 94–97 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Agarwal, R., Dhar, V.: Big data, data science, and analytics: the opportunity and challenge for IS research. Inf. Syst. Res. 25, 443–448 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Joshi, M., Krag, S.S.: Issues in data management. Sci. Eng. Ethics 16, 743–748 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Piwowar, H.A., Day, R.S., Fridsma, D.B.: Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate. PLoS ONE 2 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000308

  7. Link, G., Lumbard, K., Germonprez, M., Conboy, K., Feller, J.: Contemporary issues of open data in information systems research: considerations and recommendations. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 41, 587–610 (2018). https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.04125

  8. Yamamoto, S. (ed.): HIMI 2016. LNCS, vol. 9735. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40397-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Mayring, P.: Qualitative Content Analysis (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3709(07)11003-7

  10. Amorim, R.C., Castro, J.A., Rocha da Silva, J., Ribeiro, C.: A comparison of research data management platforms: architecture, flexible metadata and interoperability. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 16, 851–862 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0475-y

  11. Natural Science Foundation: Data Management & Sharing FAQs (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Perrier, L., et al.: Research data management in academic institutions: a scoping review. PLoS ONE 12, 1–14 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Reuter, C., Ludwig, T., Kotthaus, C., Kaufhold, M.-A., von Radziewski, E., Pipek, V.: Big data in a crisis? Creating social media datasets for crisis management research. i-com 15 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2016-0036

  14. Pinfield, S., Cox, A.M., Smith, J.: Research data management and libraries: relationships, activities, drivers and influences, pp. 1–28 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114734

  15. Hicks, B.: UK universities put their faith in the Google cloud

    Google Scholar 

  16. Piwowar, H.A., Chapman, W.W.: A review of journal policies for sharing research data (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Campbell, E.G., Clarridge, B.R., Birenbaum, L., Hilgartner, S., Blumenthal, D.: Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 287, 473–480 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.4.473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Borgmann, C.L.: Scholarship in the Digital Age. MIT Press, Cambridge (2007)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Tenopir, C., et al.: Data sharing by scientists: practices and perceptions. PLoS ONE 6, 1–21 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim, Y., Zhang, P.: Understanding data sharing behaviors of STEM researchers: the roles of attitudes, norms, and data repositories. Libr. Inf. Sci. Res. 37(3), 189–200 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2015.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hilber, B., Reintzsch, D.: Cloud Computing und Open Source-Wie groß ist die Gefahr des Copyleft bei SaaS? In: Computer Und Recht: Forum für die Praxis des Rechts der Datenverargei-tung, Information und Automation. pp. 697–702. Otto Schmidt (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Feijen, M.: What researchers want - A literature study of researchers’ requirements with respect to storage and access to research data (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wilms, K., Brenger, B., Lopez, A., Rehwald, S.: Open data in higher education – what prevents researchers from sharing research data? In: 39th International Conference on Information System, pp. 1–9 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Karkin, N., Janssen, M., Brooks, K.: Open government and data-driven policy making in the digital age. In: Americas Conference on Information System (AMCIS) (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Süptitz, T., Weis, S.J., Eymann, T.: Was müssen Virtual Research Environments leisten? -Ein Literaturreview zu den funktionalen und nichtfunktionalen Anforderungen. In: Wirtschaftsinformatik (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bankier, J.G., Gleason, K.: Institutional repository software comparison. UNESCO Communication and Information, Paris (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft: Memorandum Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice. (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hevner, A., Alexander, B.: Roles of digital innovation in design science research. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 61, 3–8 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-0571-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mayring, P.: Qualitative inhaltsanalyse. In: Boehm, A., Mengel, A., Muhr, T. (eds.) Texte verstehen: Konzepte, Methoden, Werkzeuge, pp. 159–174. UVK Univ.-Verl. Konstanz, Konstanz (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bauer, B., et al.: Forschende und ihre Daten. Ergebnisse einer österreichweiten Befragung – Report 2015. Zenodo (2015). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.31935

  31. Kim, Y., Stanton, J.M.: Institutional and individual factors affecting scientists' data-sharing behaviors: A multilevel analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 67(4), 776–799 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23424

  32. Klemm, M., Liebold, R.: Qualitative Interviews in der Organisationsforschung. In: Liebig, S., Matiaske, W., Rosenbohm, S. (eds.) Handbuch Empirische Organisationsforschung, pp. 299–324. Springer, Wiesbaden (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08580-3_13-1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Jensen, U.: Leitlinien zum Management von Forschungsdaten: Sozialwissenschaftliche Umfragedaten. Cologne, Germany (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Berendt, B., Vanschoren, J., Gao, B.: Datenanalyse und -visualisierung. In: Büttner, S., Hobohm, H., Müller, L. (eds.) Handbuch Forschungsdatenmanagement, pp. 139–148. Bock + Herchen, Bad Honnef (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Link, G., et al.: Contemporary issues of open data in information systems research: considerations and recommendations. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 41, 587–610 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.02.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ribes, D., Polk, J.B.: Flexibility relative to what? Change to research infrastructure. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 15, 287–305 (2014). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00360

  37. Vassilakopoulou, P., Skorve, E., Aanestad, M.: A commons perspective on genetic data governance. In: European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Biljon, J. V., Pottas, A., Lehong, S., Platz, M.: Content category selection towards a maturity matrix for ICT4D knowledge sharing platforms. In: International Conference on Information Resources Management (Conf-IRM) (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nugroho, R.P., Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., de Jong, M.: A comparison of national open data policies: lessons learned. Transform. Gov. People, Process Policy 9, 286–308 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-03-2014-0008

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Duisburg-Essen, 47057, Duisburg, Germany

    Lennart Hofeditz, Björn Ross, Konstantin Wilms, Marius Rother, Stephanie Rehwald & Ania López

  2. RWTH, Aachen, 52062, Aachen, Germany

    Bela Brenger

  3. University of Münster, 48149, Münster, Germany

    Raimund Vogl & Dominik Rudolph

Authors
  1. Lennart Hofeditz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Björn Ross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Konstantin Wilms
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marius Rother
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stephanie Rehwald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bela Brenger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ania López
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Raimund Vogl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Dominik Rudolph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Björn Ross .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Japan

    Sakae Yamamoto

  2. Tokyo City University, Tokyo, Japan

    Hirohiko Mori

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Hofeditz, L. et al. (2020). How to Design a Research Data Management Platform? Technical, Organizational and Individual Perspectives and Their Relations. In: Yamamoto, S., Mori, H. (eds) Human Interface and the Management of Information. Interacting with Information. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12185. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50017-7_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50017-7_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-50016-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-50017-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation