Publication: Codifying Collegiality: Recent Developments in Data Sharing Policy in the Life Sciences
Open/View Files
Date
2014
Published Version
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Public Library of Science
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.
Citation
Pham-Kanter, Genevieve, Darren E. Zinner, and Eric G. Campbell. 2014. “Codifying Collegiality: Recent Developments in Data Sharing Policy in the Life Sciences.” PLoS ONE 9 (9): e108451. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108451.
Research Data
Abstract
Over the last decade, there have been significant changes in data sharing policies and in the data sharing environment faced by life science researchers. Using data from a 2013 survey of over 1600 life science researchers, we analyze the effects of sharing policies of funding agencies and journals. We also examine the effects of new sharing infrastructure and tools (i.e., third party repositories and online supplements). We find that recently enacted data sharing policies and new sharing infrastructure and tools have had a sizable effect on encouraging data sharing. In particular, third party repositories and online supplements as well as data sharing requirements of funding agencies, particularly the NIH and the National Human Genome Research Institute, were perceived by scientists to have had a large effect on facilitating data sharing. In addition, we found a high degree of compliance with these new policies, although noncompliance resulted in few formal or informal sanctions. Despite the overall effectiveness of data sharing policies, some significant gaps remain: about one third of grant reviewers placed no weight on data sharing plans in their reviews, and a similar percentage ignored the requirements of material transfer agreements. These patterns suggest that although most of these new policies have been effective, there is still room for policy improvement.
Description
Other Available Sources
Keywords
Biology and Life Sciences, Bioethics, Scientific Beneficence, Computational Biology, Genome Analysis, Genome-Wide Association Studies, Genomic Databases, Genetics, Genomics, Engineering and Technology, Technology Development, Science Policy, Material Transfer Agreements, Publication Ethics, Science Policy and Economics, Technology Regulations
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service