[3.4] practical benefits and annoyences of sharing data - daniël lakens [3tu.datacentrum symposium...
DESCRIPTION
3TU.Datacentrum Symposium Research Data Management: Funder requirements, Questions and Solutions At this symposium the funding organisation NWO and the European Commission explained their vision, plans and requirements. Researchers from the three universities of technology shared their experiences of data management in different stages of research. And the Research Data Services team informed the audience about research data management services offered by 3TU.Datacentrum. The 3TU.Datacentrum symposium took place at the TU Delft (26 May), University of Twente (2 June) and TU Eindhoven (11 June) for and with local researchers. More information on: datacentrum.3tu.nl/over-3tudatacentrum/symposium-2014TRANSCRIPT
Practical Benefits (and Some Annoyances) of Sharing Data
Daniel Lakens Human-Technology Interaction Group Eindhoven University of Technology
Archie
• Internal solution • Data stored 7 years • Researchers can
upload, but not modify, research data
• Limited meta-data (sample size, age youngest participant, description of files)
Archie is an Integrated (Internal)Solution
1 •Submit Proposal to Ethical Board
2 •Get OK, Perform Study
3 •Upload Data & Materials
I still haven’t uploaded the data, even though if I do, I get the participant payment money back (I advanced the money). It interesting that 300-500 euro’s is not enough to get the typical researcher to hurry up with paperwork, or uploading data.
External Solution
• I do always upload data to an external solution (the Open Science Framework) before I submit an article. That’s a much better motivation than money.
External Solution
Sharing Data is Useful
• I recently co-edited a special issue on replications. One author of the original replicated work argued online the replication study was flawed due to a ceiling effect.
• All the data from the replication was online (as part of the special issue). The original researcher also made her data available.
• 5 researchers performed ‘post-publication peer review’ using the raw data.
The Bright Future: Better Meta-Data
• Having access to data for re-analysis is great. But what we want is: – Online databases which store relevant data for as
the sample size, effect size, test statistics – This allows us to meta-analytically evaluate
research lines.
• A new initiative CurateScience.org is doing this
Main Team
Thanks for Your Attention
Daniel Lakens Human-Technology Interaction Group Eindhoven University of Technology