移动研究人员,固定数据:管理数据(生产者)。

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1177/03063127231156862
Stefan Reichmann
{"title":"移动研究人员,固定数据:管理数据(生产者)。","authors":"Stefan Reichmann","doi":"10.1177/03063127231156862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scientific institutions have increasingly embraced formalized research data management strategies, which involve complex social practices of codifying the tacit dimensions of data practices. Several guidelines to facilitate these practices have been introduced in recent years, for example, the FAIR guiding principles. The aim of these practices is to foster transparency and reproducibility through 'data sharing,' the public release of data for unbounded reuse. However, a closer look suggests that many scientists' practices of data release might be better described as what I call <i>data handovers</i>. These practices are not rooted in the lofty ideals of good scientific practice and global data reuse but in the more mundane necessities of research continuity, which have become more urgent in light of increasing academic mobility. The Austrian scientists interviewed for this study reinterpreted defining features of research data management - such as ensuring findability - as techniques for managing the effects of researcher mobility. This suggests that the adoption of Open Science practices might be dissociated from its stated epistemic goals, and explains why many Open Science initiatives at present are administratively strong but normatively weak.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"53 3","pages":"341-357"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobile researchers, immobile data: Managing data (producers).\",\"authors\":\"Stefan Reichmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03063127231156862\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Scientific institutions have increasingly embraced formalized research data management strategies, which involve complex social practices of codifying the tacit dimensions of data practices. Several guidelines to facilitate these practices have been introduced in recent years, for example, the FAIR guiding principles. The aim of these practices is to foster transparency and reproducibility through 'data sharing,' the public release of data for unbounded reuse. However, a closer look suggests that many scientists' practices of data release might be better described as what I call <i>data handovers</i>. These practices are not rooted in the lofty ideals of good scientific practice and global data reuse but in the more mundane necessities of research continuity, which have become more urgent in light of increasing academic mobility. The Austrian scientists interviewed for this study reinterpreted defining features of research data management - such as ensuring findability - as techniques for managing the effects of researcher mobility. This suggests that the adoption of Open Science practices might be dissociated from its stated epistemic goals, and explains why many Open Science initiatives at present are administratively strong but normatively weak.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"volume\":\"53 3\",\"pages\":\"341-357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127231156862\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127231156862","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科研机构越来越多地采用形式化的研究数据管理策略,这涉及到编纂数据实践的隐性维度的复杂社会实践。近年来提出了若干促进这些做法的指导方针,例如《公平原则》。这些实践的目的是通过“数据共享”,即公开发布数据以无限制地重用,来促进透明度和可重复性。然而,仔细观察就会发现,许多科学家发布数据的做法可能更适合用我所说的“数据移交”来形容。这些做法并非源于良好的科学实践和全球数据重用的崇高理想,而是源于研究连续性的更世俗的必要性,鉴于学术流动性的增加,这一点变得更加紧迫。为这项研究接受采访的奥地利科学家重新解释了研究数据管理的定义特征——比如确保可查找性——作为管理研究人员流动性影响的技术。这表明开放科学实践的采用可能与其所陈述的认知目标分离,并解释了为什么目前许多开放科学倡议在管理上很强,但在规范上很弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mobile researchers, immobile data: Managing data (producers).

Scientific institutions have increasingly embraced formalized research data management strategies, which involve complex social practices of codifying the tacit dimensions of data practices. Several guidelines to facilitate these practices have been introduced in recent years, for example, the FAIR guiding principles. The aim of these practices is to foster transparency and reproducibility through 'data sharing,' the public release of data for unbounded reuse. However, a closer look suggests that many scientists' practices of data release might be better described as what I call data handovers. These practices are not rooted in the lofty ideals of good scientific practice and global data reuse but in the more mundane necessities of research continuity, which have become more urgent in light of increasing academic mobility. The Austrian scientists interviewed for this study reinterpreted defining features of research data management - such as ensuring findability - as techniques for managing the effects of researcher mobility. This suggests that the adoption of Open Science practices might be dissociated from its stated epistemic goals, and explains why many Open Science initiatives at present are administratively strong but normatively weak.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Wake effects and temperature plumes: Coping with non-knowledge in the expansion of wind and geothermal energy. Population curation: The construction of mutual obligation between individual and state in Danish precision medicine. Hearts and minds: The technopolitical role of affect in sociotechnical imaginaries. Cells and the city: The rise and fall of urban biopolitics in San Francisco, 1970-2020. What work does ‘contamination’ do? An agential realist account of oil wastewater and radium in groundwater
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1