Incentive or disincentive for research data disclosure? A large-scale empirical analysis and implications for open science policy
Incentive or disincentive for research data disclosure? A large-scale empirical analysis and implications for open science policy
复制标题
对研究数据披露的激励还是抑制？
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102371
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
21
通讯作者：
Motohashi Kazuyuki
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kwon Seokbeom;Motohashi Kazuyuki
当研究者公开其原始数据时，可以提高其研究成果的可见性，获得更多的学分（学分效应）。相比之下，这样做可能会加速知识替代过程，从而消散他们的研究工作可能获得的学术信誉（竞争效应）。在这项研究中，我们研究了科学家是否以及在多大程度上通过公开披露他们的数据来获得学术荣誉。我们对各种文献的回顾假设，数据披露研究在短期内比非数据披露研究获得更多的学术信誉。然而，随着竞争效应的出现，这种差异逐渐消失并逆转。这种模式预计会根据发表数据披露研究的期刊的学术声誉而系统性地有所不同。我们通过分析2010年发表的超过31万篇Web of Science Core Collection （WoS CC）索引期刊文章的元数据，对所得假设进行了实证检验。我们的分析支持这两种假设。本研究有助于正在进行的关于需要制度性措施来促进科学家研究数据披露的政策讨论。
When researchers disclose their original data, they can enhance the visibility of their research works and gain more academic credits (credit effect). By contrast, doing so may accelerate the knowledge replacement process, which dissipates the academic credit that their research works may have received (competition effect). In this study, we examine whether and the extent to which scientists gain academic credit for their research works by publicly disclosing their data. Our review of various literature hypothesizes that data-disclosing research gains more academic credit than non-data-disclosing research in the short term. However, this difference gradually disappears and reverses as the competition effect emerges. This pattern is expected to systematically differ depending on the academic reputation of the journals where the data-disclosing research is published. We empirically test the derived hypotheses by analyzing the metadata of over 310,000 Web of Science Core Collection (WoS CC)-indexed journal articles published in 2010. Our analysis supports both hypotheses. The present study contributes to the on-going policy discussion about the need for institutional measures to promote disclosure of research data by scientists.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1001/jama.1997.03540390054035
发表时间：
1997-04
期刊：
JAMA
影响因子：
--
作者：
D. Blumenthal;E. Campbell;Melissa S. Anderson;N. Causino;K. Louis
通讯作者：
D. Blumenthal;E. Campbell;Melissa S. Anderson;N. Causino;K. Louis
咆哮的肿瘤鼠：混合交换策略是重叠机构边界的区别来源1
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Fiona E. Murray
通讯作者：
Fiona E. Murray
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
McDonald, R. J.;Cloft, H. J.;Kallmes, D. F.
通讯作者：
Kallmes, D. F.
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Archambault, Eric;Lariviere, Vincent
通讯作者：
Lariviere, Vincent
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Sotaro Shibayama;John P. Walsh;Y. Baba
通讯作者：
Y. Baba