↓ Skip to main content

Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
8 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
157 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
4 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
310 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
389 Mendeley
citeulike
15 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0134826
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carol Tenopir, Elizabeth D. Dalton, Suzie Allard, Mike Frame, Ivanka Pjesivac, Ben Birch, Danielle Pollock, Kristina Dorsett

Abstract

The incorporation of data sharing into the research lifecycle is an important part of modern scholarly debate. In this study, the DataONE Usability and Assessment working group addresses two primary goals: To examine the current state of data sharing and reuse perceptions and practices among research scientists as they compare to the 2009/2010 baseline study, and to examine differences in practices and perceptions across age groups, geographic regions, and subject disciplines. We distributed surveys to a multinational sample of scientific researchers at two different time periods (October 2009 to July 2010 and October 2013 to March 2014) to observe current states of data sharing and to see what, if any, changes have occurred in the past 3-4 years. We also looked at differences across age, geographic, and discipline-based groups as they currently exist in the 2013/2014 survey. Results point to increased acceptance of and willingness to engage in data sharing, as well as an increase in actual data sharing behaviors. However, there is also increased perceived risk associated with data sharing, and specific barriers to data sharing persist. There are also differences across age groups, with younger respondents feeling more favorably toward data sharing and reuse, yet making less of their data available than older respondents. Geographic differences exist as well, which can in part be understood in terms of collectivist and individualist cultural differences. An examination of subject disciplines shows that the constraints and enablers of data sharing and reuse manifest differently across disciplines. Implications of these findings include the continued need to build infrastructure that promotes data sharing while recognizing the needs of different research communities. Moving into the future, organizations such as DataONE will continue to assess, monitor, educate, and provide the infrastructure necessary to support such complex grand science challenges.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 157 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 389 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Germany 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 6 2%
Unknown 362 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 72 19%
Researcher 64 16%
Student > Master 57 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 10%
Other 25 6%
Other 85 22%
Unknown 49 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 82 21%
Computer Science 67 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 7%
Arts and Humanities 23 6%
Other 93 24%
Unknown 66 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 169. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2023.
All research outputs
#244,131
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#3,539
of 225,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,839
of 282,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#66
of 6,050 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,486 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,501 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,050 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.