While it is nice if academics are cooperative, a lot of work these days is from big commercial interests like pharmaceutical companies. I’m thinking of the kind of insights IBM Watson or statistical inference techniques or might glean from proprietary datasets like from hospital (network) records or full genome sequencing. It’s a jungle out there. Maybe it is just hopeless to be open?
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 9:57 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The State of Open Data: New Global Report Shares Survey Findings From Researchers | LJ INFOdocket This is worth the read .. the key findings. Interesting motivations. -- Owen Key Findings · For the majority of respondents, open data is already a reality: o Approximately three quarters of respondents have made their research data openly available at some point; a similar number are aware of data sets that are open to access, reuse, repurpose and redistribute. o Researchers in the social sciences demonstrate the highest level of awareness by subject area, while by geography, researchers in Asia demonstrate the least familiarity. · Researchers place value on the credit they receive for making data open: o Nearly 70% of researchers value as data citation as much as an article citation. A further 10% value a data citation more than an article citation. · Awareness of open data transcends age and career progression: o Encouragingly, Principal Investigators (PIs) and Professors consistently responded similarly to PhD students and Post-doctoral fellows in their awareness of open data useage. · Respondents admit to uncertainty and gaps in their knowledge and are hungry for more information, perhaps one set of critical factors that hold back progression in open data sharing o Of the researchers who have already made their data open, 60% of respondents are unsure about the licensing conditions under which they have already shared their data, and thus the extent to which it can be accessed or reused. o Researchers are uncertain who will meet the costs of making data open. o More than half of respondents said they would welcome more guidance on compliance with their funder’s policy. · Researchers are uncertain of how to cite datasets: o Less than half of respondents say they are confident in how to cite a secondary research dataset. · There are indications that the future will be more open: o Researchers who have never made data openly available are considering doing so – of respondents who have not made any data open to date, 44% will definitely consider doing so in the future, and a further 46% might consider doing so. o Regional differences exist: North American respondents who have not yet made data open are most likely to do so in the future; Asian respondents are least likely to do so. o On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Tom Johnson <t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>> wrote: FYI http://www.infodocket.com/2016/10/25/the-state-of-open-data-new-global-report-shares-survey-findings-from-researchers/ =================================== Tom Johnson - Inst. for Analytic Journalism Santa Fe, NM t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com> 505-473-9646<tel:505-473-9646> =================================== ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
