Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
761
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
761 results for “data journal”
Le Journal of Open Humanities Data (JOHD) : enjeux et défis dans la publication de data papers pour les sciences humaines et sociales (SHS)
<p>This repository hosts the pre-print version of the paper and the data used for the following publication:</p> <p>Marongiu, Paola; Pedrazzini, Nilo; Ribary, Marton; McGillivray, Barbara (forthcoming). "<strong>Le <em>Journal of Open Humanities Data</em> (<em>JOHD</em>) : enjeux et défis dans la publication de <em>data papers</em> pour les sciences humaines et sociales (SHS)</strong>". In Schopfel, Joachim and Kosmopoulos, Christine (eds.) Publier, partager, réutiliser les données de la recherche: les data papers et leurs enjeux. Lille: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.</p> <p>The file "johd_publications.xlsx" contains the data used for the section "Publier des<em> data papers</em> pour les SHS : l’expérience du<em> JOHD</em>". This includes all relevant information about the papers published by the Journal of Open Humanities data. The title of the published paper; the DOI; the date of publication; the special collection in which the paper was published (if any); the keywords associated with the paper; the names of the authors.</p> <p>The zip folder "datapapers_catalyseurs.zip" contains the data used for the section "Les <em>data papers</em> : des catalyseurs de la réutilisation des données ?". This includes information about the papers published by the Journal of Open Humanities data and their corresponding datasets (downloads, views, tweets, citations and Altmetric).</p>
Data supplementing Lichtenberg et al. (2023) Differential effects of soil conservation practices on arthropods and crop yields. Journal of Applied Entomology
<p>This dataset contains data and scripts that supplement the publication</p> <p>Lichtenberg et al. Differential effects of soil conservation practices on arthropods and crop yields. J. Appl. Entomol. 147: 931-940. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.13188">https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.13188</a></p> <p>Please cite the above article if you use any of the included data or code.</p> <p>Files are described in README.md.</p>
Data on publication volumes for selected open access journals and platforms
<p>This dataset accompanies the report 'Scenario Modelling for Open Research Europe', prepared for the European Commission's Directorate-General for Research and Innovation by Rob Johnson of Research Consulting, acting in the capacity of an independent expert. The data was extracted from www.lens.org in May 2023 to asset historic patterns of publication growth for a sample of open access journals and platforms.</p>
Data on Authorship Gender in Ranked, Unranked, and Interdisciplinary Philosophy Journals (JSTOR Database, 1900-2010)
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Games academics play and their consequences: how authorship, h-index, and journal impact factors are shaping the future of academia
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Supplementary material 1 from: Biniari K, Daskalakis I, Bouza D, Stavrakaki M (2019) Comparative study of qualitative and quantitative characters of grape cultivar 'Mavrodafni' (Vitis vinifera L.) and 'Renio' grown in different regions of the Protected Designation of Origin Mavrodafni Patras. Viticulture Data Journal 1: e37852. https://doi.org/10.3897/vdj.1.e37852
<p>This is the raw dataset of the measurements performed on the samples collected from the two varieties from the different locations. There are three repetitions per measurement and no statistical analysis has been performed.</p>
Open Peer Review Journal Data
<p>This csv file contains a descriptive dataset of <strong>617</strong> scholarly journals that make use of a form of Open Peer Review (OPR) based on Open Reports and/or Open Reviewer Identities. The data file contains the following fields:</p> <p>Journal Title</p> <p>Year of First Identified OPR Occurrence (2001-2019)</p> <p>High Level Discipline of the Journal (Humanities, Medical and Health Sciences, Multidisciplinary, Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Technology)</p> <p>Journal URL</p> <p>Journal Publisher</p> <p>Publisher Country</p> <p>Use of Open Reports (Decided by Author, Decided by Editor, Mandated by Journal, None)</p> <p>Use of Open Reviewer Identities (Decided by Reviewer, Mandated, None)</p> <p>Notes that provide additional information about the journal</p>
Features of research data policies of Earth science and biodiversity academic society journals
<p>Dataset related to Hübner (2020) Earth science and biodiversity journals can improve support for data publication. Preprint: https://doi.org/10.23689/fidgeo-3818</p> <p>This study reviews research data policies and author instructions of 31 journals from the Earth sciences and from biodiversity that are published by German learned societies or research institutions. The statements on data publishing of the journal´s data policies / author guidelines were matched to 14 pre-defined features of journal research data policies from Hrynaszkiewicz, I. et al. (2020) Developing a Research Data Policy Framework for All Journals and Publishers. Data Science Journal, 19: 5, pp. 1–15. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-005">https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-005</a>.</p>
Data from: Gender diversity of editorial boards and gender differences in the peer review process at six journals of ecology and evolution.
<p>Despite substantial progress for women in science, women remain underrepresented in many aspects of the scholarly publication process. We examined how the gender diversity of editors and reviewers changed over time for six journals in ecology and evolution (2003-2015 for four journals, 2007-2015 or 2009-2015 for the other two), and how several aspects of the peer review process differed between female and male editors and reviewers. We found that, for five of the six journals, women were either absent or very poorly represented as handling editors at the beginning of our dataset. The representation of women among handling editors increased gradually and consistently, with women making up 29% of the handling editors (averaged across journals) in 2015, similar to the representation of women as last authors on ecology papers (23% in 2015) but lower than the proportion of women among all authors (31%) and among members of the societies that own the journals (37-40%). The proportion of women among reviewers has also gradually but consistently increased over time, reaching 27% by 2015. Female editors invited more female reviewers than did male editors, and this difference increased with age of the editor. Men and women who were invited to review did not differ in whether they responded to the review invitation, but, of those that responded, women were slightly more likely to agree to review. In contrast, women were less likely than men to accept invitations to serve on journal editorial boards. Our analyses indicate that there has been progress in the representation of women as reviewers and editors in ecology and evolutionary biology, but women are still underrepresented among the gatekeepers of scholarly publishing relative to their representation among researchers.</p>
Data from: The effectiveness of journals as arbiters of scientific quality
Academic publishers purport to be arbiters of knowledge, aiming to publish studied that advance the frontiers of their research domain. Yet the effectiveness of journal editors at identifying novel and important research is generally unknown, in part because of the confidential nature of the editorial and peer-review process. Using questionnaires, we evaluated the degree to which journals are effective arbiters of scientific impact in the domain of Ecology, quantified by three key criteria. First, journals discriminated against low-impact manuscripts: the probability of rejection increased as the number of citations gained by the published paper decreased. Second, journals were more likely to publish high-impact manuscripts (those that obtained citations in 90th percentile for their journal) than run-of-the-mill manuscripts; editors were only 23 and 41% as likely to reject an eventual high-impact paper (pre- versus post-review rejection) compared to a run-of-the-mill paper. Third, editors did occasionally reject papers that went on to be highly cited. Error rates were low, however: only 3.8% of rejected papers gained more citations than the median article in the journal that rejected them, and only 9.2% of rejected manuscripts went on to be high-impact papers in the (generally lower impact factor) publishing journal. The effectiveness of scientific arbitration increased with journal prominence, although some highly prominent journals were no more effective than much less prominent ones. We conclude that the academic publishing system, founded on peer review, appropriately recognises the significance of research contained in manuscripts, as measured by the number of citations that manuscripts obtain after publication, even though some errors are made. We therefore recommend that authors reduce publication delays by choosing journals appropriate to the significance of their research.
International Journal of Hidden Data Mining and Scientific Knowledge Discovery
<p>Welcome to the first issue of the International Journal of Hidden Data Mining and Scientific Knowledge Discovery: http://scholarpage.org/journal</p> <p>We decided to use the following acronym HDSKD for the journal. Hidden data represents data or information that is more or less hidden, unseen or encrypted so that it becomes difficult to extract it. Scientific knowledge represents every information that comes by a scientific way, such as theories, experimental observations or scientific evidences of some phenomenon. The last term in the journal title, namely "Discovery" has a great importance, since it means that we are looking for scientific information particularly and hidden data in general.<br /> Authors are encouraged to submit their latest research results to the HDSKD journal Hence, we are proud to announce the opening of our first journal issue in hidden data mining and scientific knowledge discovery (a peer reviewed journal) and encourage authors to submit their latest research results to HDSKD.<br /> The criteria of selection are based on the review decision, which will lead to the acceptance or reject of the paper.<br /> The readers’ comments are also welcome and everyone is invited to read or download the papers for a scientific or academic purposes. The journal is a non-profit academic source of knowledge and does not permit any commercial use of the articles.</p> <p><br /> The Editorial Board</p>
Figure 2. from New data on recently described rodent species Paulina's Limestone Rat Saxatilomys paulinae Musser, Smith, Robinson & Lunde, 2005 (Mammalia: Rodentia) - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4961 (19 May 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4961
Figure 2. - Ventral view of Saxatilomyspaulinae from Quang Binh province.
Figure 3. from Inventory of the Heteroptera (Insecta: Hemiptera) in Komaba Campus of the University of Tokyo, a highly urbanized area in Japan - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4981 (24 April 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4981
Figure 3. - An example of a campus sampling point, indicating as "pic1" in Fig. 2.
Figure 3. from New data on recently described rodent species Paulina's Limestone Rat Saxatilomys paulinae Musser, Smith, Robinson & Lunde, 2005 (Mammalia: Rodentia) - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4961 (19 May 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4961
Figure 3. - Skull of adult S.paulinae.
Figure 6. from Inventory of the Heteroptera (Insecta: Hemiptera) in Komaba Campus of the University of Tokyo, a highly urbanized area in Japan - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4981 (24 April 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4981
Figure 6. - An example of a campus sampling point, indicating as "pic4" in Fig. 2.
Figure 3. from Collecting and Preserving Marine and Freshwater Isopoda (Crustacea: Peracarida) - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4912 (12 May 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4912
Figure 3. - N. Dean Pentcheff removing live isopod specimens from a coral rubble washed sample.
Figure 2. from Bridging the distributional gap of Tylorida striata (Thorell, 1877) and new synonymy (Araneae: Tetragnathidae) - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4878 (26 March 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4878
Figure 2. - Tyloridastriata, live female from India (BNHS Sp. 139).
Figure 5. from Inventory of the Heteroptera (Insecta: Hemiptera) in Komaba Campus of the University of Tokyo, a highly urbanized area in Japan - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4981 (24 April 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4981
Figure 5. - An example of a campus sampling point, indicating as "pic3" in Fig. 2.
Figure 5. from New data on recently described rodent species Paulina's Limestone Rat Saxatilomys paulinae Musser, Smith, Robinson & Lunde, 2005 (Mammalia: Rodentia) - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4961 (19 May 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4961
Figure 5. - Microhabitat of S.paulinae in Thuong Hoa Commune.
Supplementary file pwt: taxa data from Black flies (Diptera: Simuliidae) of Turkish Thrace, with a new record for Turkey - Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4834 (22 April 2015) https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e4834
taxa data
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.