[open-science] Brief persuasive case for data sharing?

[Angus Whyte]

Hi Heather

Thanks.. I'll get back to you on that! There is that study by Wuchty 
showing that publications from large collaborations get cited more, so 
It would be really interesting to look at whether it is a factor. I'd 
like to collaborate...though more days in the week would be useful :)

Angus



On 04/09/2010 00:54, Heather Piwowar wrote:
> Hi Angus,
>
> Good question.  Unfortunately I haven't looked at that.  That study 
> was pretty small and so only permitted a few covariates.
>
> fwiw, I hope to look at it in the future.  As a result of my 
> dissertation, I now have a dataset that contains "number of authors" 
> and 100+ other covariates for 11,000 publications that created gene 
> expression microarray data, 25% of which shared have an associated 
> dataset in public repositories.  I need to gather citation data for 
> all these publications, then will have a comprehensive look at the 
> citation benefit.  Just need more hours in the day.  Or a 
> collaborator!  The dataset is publicly available 
> <http://github.com/hpiwowar/Piwowar-Thesis-Aim3-2010> :)
>
> Heather
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Angus Whyte <a.whyte at ed.ac.uk 
> <mailto:a.whyte at ed.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>     Heather,
>
>     I wondered if you have found this association holding up
>     independently of the number of authors?
>
>     Angus Whyte,
>     DCC
>
>
>
>
>     On 03/09/2010 22:11, Heather Piwowar wrote:
>>     Thanks Dorothea!
>>
>>     That study was also published in PLoS ONE, in case you prefer a
>>     non-dissertation citation:
>>     http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0000308
>>
>>     Similar, but earlier and with a way cooler title, is Gleditsch
>>     and Strand's "Posting Your Data: Will You Be Scooped or Will You
>>     Be Famous?"
>>     http://www.prio.no/Research-and-Publications/Publication/?oid=55406
>>
>>     Chris, another argument I've often heard: publicly archive your
>>     data so that you can find it again later, yourself :)
>>
>>     There's also lots to be said about "being the change you want to
>>     see," supplemented with stats on the frequency and implications
>>     of data withholding, etc.  Let me know if you want refs, or you
>>     can brave a mongo list of refs on data sharing/withholding at
>>     Mendeley
>>     <http://www.mendeley.com/research-papers/collections/3498871/Data-sharing-and-withholding/>.
>>      I have many relevant papers tagged with "motivation" or similar.
>>
>>     You might also find something useful in the latter part of these
>>     presentations? (1
>>     <http://www.slideshare.net/hpiwowar/why-study-data-sharing-why-share-your-data%20>,
>>     2
>>     <http://www.slideshare.net/hpiwowar/measuring-the-adoption-of-open-science-presentation>)
>>
>>     Let me know if I can be of more help....
>>
>>     Heather
>>
>>     Heather Piwowar
>>     / /
>>
>>     / /
>>
>>     / /
>>
>>     / /
>>
>>     / /
>>
>>     /
>>
>>     DataONE postdoc with NESCent and Dryad
>>
>>
>>     //
>>
>>     remote from Dept of Zoology, UBC, Vancouver Canada
>>
>>
>>     //
>>
>>     hpiwowar at nescent.org <mailto:hpiwowar at nescent.org>
>>
>>
>>     // //
>>
>>     http://researchremix.org
>>
>>     // //@researchremix
>>
>>     <http://twitter.com/researchremix>/
>>     On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Dorothea Salo
>>     <dorothea.salo at gmail.com <mailto:dorothea.salo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Maybe try this:
>>
>>         “Publicly available data was significantly (p=0.006)
>>         associated with a
>>         69% increase in citations, independently of journal impact
>>         factor,
>>         date of publication, and author country of origin.” Piwowar,
>>         Heather.
>>         “Foundational studies for measuring the impact, prevalence, and
>>         patterns of publicly sharing biomedical research data.”
>>         Dissertation,
>>         University of Pittsburgh, 2010.
>>
>>         I just popped it into a slideshow of mine. I've also seen
>>         people use
>>         the recent NYT story about data-sharing and Alzheimer's,
>>         though it's
>>         not quite a paradigm case because the data there weren't
>>         fully open.
>>
>>         Dorothea
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     open-science mailing list
>>     open-science at lists.okfn.org <mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
>>     http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>
>
>     The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>     Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     open-science mailing list
>     open-science at lists.okfn.org <mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
>     http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20100904/9b414231/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20100904/9b414231/attachment-0001.ksh>