Literature DB >> 21108019

The essential nature of sharing in science.

Beth A Fischer1, Michael J Zigmond.   

Abstract

Advances in science are the combined result of the efforts of a great many scientists, and in many cases, their willingness to share the products of their research. These products include data sets, both small and large, and unique research resources not commercially available, such as cell lines and software programs. The sharing of these resources enhances both the scope and the depth of research, while making more efficient use of time and money. However, sharing is not without costs, many of which are borne by the individual who develops the research resource. Sharing, for example, reduces the uniqueness of the resources available to a scientist, potentially influencing the originator's perceived productivity and ultimately his or her competitiveness for jobs, promotions, and grants. Nevertheless, for most researchers-particularly those using public funds-sharing is no longer optional but must be considered an obligation to science, the funding agency, and ultimately society at large. Most funding agencies, journals, and professional societies now require a researcher who has published work involving a unique resource to make that resource available to other investigators. Changes could be implemented to mitigate some of the costs. The creator of the resource could explore the possibility of collaborating with those who request it. In addition, institutions that employ and fund researchers could change their policies and practices to make sharing a more attractive and viable option. For example, when evaluating an individual's productivity, institutions could provide credit for the impact a researcher has had on their field through the provision of their unique resources to other investigators, regardless of whether that impact is reflected in the researcher's list of publications. In addition, increased funding for the development and maintenance of user-friendly public repositories for data and research resources would also help to reduce barriers to sharing by minimizing the time, effort, and funding needed by individual investigators to comply with requests for their unique resource. Indeed, sharing is an imperative, but it is also essential to find ways to protect for both the original owner of the resource and those wishing to share it.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21108019     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-010-9239-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  15 in total

1.  Responsible conduct regarding scientific communication

Authors: 
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2000-01-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey.

Authors:  Eric G Campbell; Brian R Clarridge; Manjusha Gokhale; Lauren Birenbaum; Stephen Hilgartner; Neil A Holtzman; David Blumenthal
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002 Jan 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Sharing scientific data II: normative issues.

Authors:  Vivian Weil; Rachelle Hollander
Journal:  IRB       Date:  1990 Mar-Apr

4.  An unpublished letter of Robert Hooke to Isaac Newton.

Authors:  A KOYRE
Journal:  Isis       Date:  1952-12       Impact factor: 0.688

5.  To give or not to give? That is the question.

Authors:  Athanasios Theologis; Ronald W Davis
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 8.340

6.  Funding high-throughput data sharing.

Authors:  Catherine A Ball; Gavin Sherlock; Alvis Brazma
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 54.908

7.  Supplementary data need to be kept in public repositories.

Authors:  Carlos Santos; Judith Blake; David J States
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-12-08       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Neuroimaging databases.

Authors: 
Journal:  Science       Date:  2001-06-01       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  The Achilles heel of the University Group Diabetes Program.

Authors:  C Kilo; J P Miller; J R Williamson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1980-02-01       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate.

Authors:  Heather A Piwowar; Roger S Day; Douglas B Fridsma
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  13 in total

1.  Sharing data is a shared responsibility: Commentary on: "The essential nature of sharing in science".

Authors:  Joe Giffels
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2010-10-02       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Positive organizational outcomes associated with a penchant for openness.

Authors:  G Steven McMillan; Debra L Casey
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2012-10-13       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Effect of impact factor and discipline on journal data sharing policies.

Authors:  David B Resnik; Melissa Morales; Rachel Landrum; Min Shi; Jessica Minnier; Nicole A Vasilevsky; Robin E Champieux
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 4.  The impact of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 2: What role do public-private partnerships have in pushing the boundaries of clinical and basic science research on Alzheimer's disease?

Authors:  Dorothy M Jones-Davis; Neil Buckholtz
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 21.566

5.  The Changing Nature of Scientific Sharing and Withholding in Academic Life Sciences Research: Trends From National Surveys in 2000 and 2013.

Authors:  Darren E Zinner; Genevieve Pham-Kanter; Eric G Campbell
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  Underutilization of specimens in biobanks: an ethical as well as a practical concern?

Authors:  R Jean Cadigan; Eric Juengst; Arlene Davis; Gail Henderson
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 8.822

7.  Mine, yours, ours? Sharing data on human genetic variation.

Authors:  Nicola Milia; Alessandra Congiu; Paolo Anagnostou; Francesco Montinaro; Marco Capocasa; Emanuele Sanna; Giovanni Destro Bisol
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Codifying collegiality: recent developments in data sharing policy in the life sciences.

Authors:  Genevieve Pham-Kanter; Darren E Zinner; Eric G Campbell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  When data sharing gets close to 100%: what human paleogenetics can teach the open science movement.

Authors:  Paolo Anagnostou; Marco Capocasa; Nicola Milia; Emanuele Sanna; Cinzia Battaggia; Daniela Luzi; Giovanni Destro Bisol
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-23       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Samples and data accessibility in research biobanks: an explorative survey.

Authors:  Marco Capocasa; Paolo Anagnostou; Flavio D'Abramo; Giulia Matteucci; Valentina Dominici; Giovanni Destro Bisol; Fabrizio Rufo
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.