[open-science] Data Watch

Sat Jun 8 00:37:24 UTC 2013

On 8 June 2013 00:26, Jack Park <jackpark at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would be curious what is meant by "aggregate" in this context. I am
> wondering whether the term "federate" fits here, by which I mean that,
> when one aggregates, one also organizes according to the topic(s) in
> play. Am I close?

Yes. The intended goal is to reach of better mass by federating voices
under a certain relevant topic of interest.

One expression of this idea would be to go beyond the fact that
'Journal of Topic A' and 'Applied Journal of Topic A' don't do well in
promoting access to data while highlighting that 'Open Journal of
Topic A' does a better job, but also that the Topic A community
neglects data sharing in general compared to Topic B community.

Laurent

> Jack
>
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Laurent Gatto <lg390 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> On 7 June 2013 19:32, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> I'm obviously very supportive of DataWatch.  I think that some of our
>>> activity may be per-journal rather than per-paper (e.g. when Neuroscience
>>> said they no longer required suppdata). DataWatch should then challenge the
>>
>> An maybe also aggregate at the level of topic/field? Different
>> communities have quite different habits and views on the topic of data
>> sharing.
>>
>>> policy rather than the instance. And there may be areas where we can give
>>> POSITIVE acclaim where a journal adopts a data pub policy.
>>>
>>> Assuming that DataWatch takes off then it gives much more likelihood of
>>> getting responses from editors and publishers and collating policies.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Jenny Molloy <jenny.molloy at okfn.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure you're familiar with the excellent blog Retraction Watch run by
>>>> Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/
>>>>
>>>> In an blog post in 2012 [1], Jonathan Eisen suggested having a Data Watch
>>>> site in the same vein. We discussed something similar in the Open Science
>>>> Working Group at various times previously.
>>>>
>>>> We had considered using it to discuss both invalidated datasets (more like
>>>> retraction watch) and data sharing cases where data is simply not available
>>>> to back up published research, particularly where researchers refuse to
>>>> share data despite agreements with funders or publishers to do so on
>>>> request. The most well known examples recently being Reinhart-Rogoff [2] and
>>>> (many) clinical trials [3].
>>>>
>>>> It would be interesting in the case of datasets found to be invalid to
>>>> classify where the problem arose - mislabelling of columns, coding errors,
>>>> data gaps?
>>>>
>>>> If you're interested in working on something like this (and the exact
>>>> formulation of this is still very much up for discussion - all thoughts
>>>> welcome!), then speak now and we can set up a group of founding editors :)
>>>>
>>>> Jenny
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> http://phylogenomics.blogspot.com/2012/01/draft-post-cleanup-3-open-knowledge.html
>>>> [2]
>>>> http://blog.okfn.org/2013/04/22/reinhart-rogoff-revisited-why-we-need-open-data-in-economics/
>>>> [3] http://www.alltrials.net/
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> open-science mailing list
>>>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peter Murray-Rust
>>> Reader in Molecular Informatics
>>> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
>>> University of Cambridge
>>> CB2 1EW, UK
>>> +44-1223-763069
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> open-science mailing list
>>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Laurent Gatto
>> - http://proteome.sysbiol.cam.ac.uk/lgatto/
>> Cambridge Centre for Proteomics
>> - http://www.bio.cam.ac.uk/proteomics
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-science mailing list
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science

--
Laurent Gatto
- http://proteome.sysbiol.cam.ac.uk/lgatto/
Cambridge Centre for Proteomics
- http://www.bio.cam.ac.uk/proteomics