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.
17
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
17 results for “User perception”
User Study Data for "Perception of Ultrasound Haptic Focal Point Motion"
<p>Data from two experiments about the perception of ultrasound haptic feedback.</p>
UI Dark Patterns and Where to Find Them: A Study on Mobile Applications and User Perception
<p>UI Dark Patterns and Where to Find Them: A Study on Mobile Applications and User Perception</p> <p> </p> <p>This dataset contains:</p> <ul> <li>survey_data.xlsx: Read-only spreadsheet containing the answers of 541 participants of our online survey (48 participants opted to not make their answers publicly available);</li> <li>classification_data.xlsx: Read-only spreadsheet containing the overall and the individual categorization of 240 mobile apps with respect to the presence of dark patterns; and,</li> <li>Videos.zip: videos of 15 apps (10 minutes each) used to classify the apps. The complete set of videos is considerably large and can be provided upon request.</li> </ul>
Citizen science at public libraries: Data on librarians and users perceptions of participating in a citizen science project in Catalunya, Spain
<p>As libraries struggle to keep pace with the changing societal landscape, emerging practices such as citizen science (CS) initiatives are being incorporated to reinforce the idea of public libraries as gathering, meeting, and collaboration spaces within the context of shared community and shared learning resources. However, there is little empirical evidence of whether the most open and participatory ways that CS puts forward can converge with and be nurtured by the essence of public libraries. Also, the roles of librarians and users in the ‘next generation public library’ have been under-developed. As the number of CS initiatives at public libraries grows, so does the need to collect evidence on the impact and the capacity of assimilation of CS practices. The data describes librarians and users' perceptions of participating in a citizen science project. Two hands-on activities for librarians of the Barcelona Network of Public Libraries were implemented. One was a training course for 30 librarians from 24 libraries which allowed them to envisage citizen science implementation in each library. The second activity consisted in the co-creation of a citizen social science project. 40 library users, 7 librarians from 3 different cities, and professional scientists, were involved. The data on librarians and users' perception was collected through participant observation, surveys, and a focus group to identify strengths and challenges of implementing citizen science at public libraries. The data covers librarians and users attitudes towards citizen science, their motivations to participate, their perceived ability to implement a citizen science project (as for librarians) or to contribute to science (as for library users), and the participants intention to keep engaged with citizen science, drawing on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Responses to closed-ended survey questions are analyzed at a descriptive level. The qualitative feedback from the focus group and the open-ended survey question on motivations is subjected to a thematic analysis. The data offers interesting insights to identify opportunities and challenges of implementing citizen science at public libraries, contributing to the debate over the public library's mission as local community hub.</p> <p>The dataset is formed by 5 tables:</p> <ol> <li>Librarians_pre.csv: data on librarians profiles, attitudes towards citizen science, expected impact of the project and self-efficacy collected at the beginning of the Citizen Science Lab.</li> <li>Librarians_post.csv: data on librarians profiles, attitudes towards citizen science, perceived impact of the project and self-efficacy collected at the end of the Citizen Science Lab.</li> <li>Users_first_phase.csv: data on users profiles, motivation, attitudes towards the library, confidence to perform scientific tasks and self-efficacy collected at the beginning of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> <li>Users_second_phase.csv: data on users profiles and motivation collected at the middle of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> <li>Users_last_phase.csv: data on users profiles, attitudes towards the library, confidence to perform scientific tasks and perceived impact of the project collected at the end of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> </ol> <p><strong>Citizen Science Lab Questionnaire (Librarians_pre)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [rol_1] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Director</li> <li>Library technician</li> <li>Support technician</li> <li>Service support</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_1] How long have you been working at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>2 or less</li> <li>3 to 5 years</li> <li>6 to 10 years</li> <li>11 to 20 years</li> <li>more than 20 years</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [back_1] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [know_1] Have you already heard about citizen science?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [part_1] Have you already participated in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards users engagement</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [att_lib_pre1] Do you believe that library users are able to participate in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>7. [att_lib_pre2] Do you believe that library users will commit to participating in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Expected impacts</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [exp_lib_pre] To what extent do you believe that citizen science may bring positive impacts to your library?</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Self-efficacy</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>9. [se_lib_pre1] Right now, do you feel able to recommend any citizen science project to library users?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>10. [se_lib_pre2] Right now, do you feel able to implement yourself and lead a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Citizen Science Lab Questionnaire (Librarians_post)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [years_2] How long have you been working at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>2 or less</li> <li>3 to 5 years</li> <li>6 to 10 years</li> <li>11 to 20 years</li> <li>more than 20 years</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [back_2] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [sat_1] To what extent does the project meet your initial expectations?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards users engagement</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [att_lib_post1] Do you believe that library users will commit to participating in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [att_lib_post2] What are/could be the potential barriers to users engagement in citizen science?</p> </td> <td> <p>[open]</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Perceived impact</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [imp_lib] What do you believe that citizen science may bring to public libraries and users?</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <p>a. Knowledge of the scientific process</p> <p>b. New connections among participants </p> <p>c. Fun</p> <p>d. New knowledge of the local environment</p> <p>e. Scientific evidence on a common concern</p> <p>f. Social cohesion</p> <p>g. Positive attitudes towards science</p> <p>h. Willingness to learn</p> <p>i. Critical thinking and self-efficacy</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Self-efficacy</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [se_lib_post1] Right now, do you feel able to recommend any citizen science project to library users?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>9. [se_lib_post2] Right now, do you feel able to implement yourself and lead a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Intention to keep engaged</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>10. [eng_lib] To what extent are you motivated to keep engaged with citizen science?</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Focus group guide (Librarians)</strong></p> <p><strong>Opening questions</strong></p> <p><strong>1.</strong> To start with…. Are you satisfied with the project?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> Yes, no, why? Was it fun/interesting/challenging/enriching….</p> <p><strong>2.</strong> Do you feel you have learned something new?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> About your library’s environment, users, science and citizen science... Is there anything special that you will take with you after the project?</p> <p><strong>Reflections on the cocreation process</strong></p> <p><strong>3.</strong> At what time during the project have you felt most comfortable?</p> <p><strong>Probe:</strong> For example, has it been easier to lead the activity and/or involve and retain the community? Did you find it entertaining?</p> <p><strong>4.</strong> At what time during the project have you felt less at ease?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> What was challenging during the cocreation process?</p> <p><strong>5.</strong> To what extent do you feel more capable of implementing and leading a citizen science project in your library right now?</p> <p><strong>Probe: </strong>For example, in the case of both more crowdsourcing and of cocreated projects that actively involve the community</p> <p><strong>Reflections on the perceived impact</strong></p> <p><strong>6. </strong>To what extent does the project meet your initial expectations?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> in line with what you discussed at the beginning of the project, you expected it to promote participation, new connections among participants, improve the library perceptions and stimulate the participants’ critical thinking...Do you think that citizen science may meet these expectations?</p> <p><strong>Reflections on citizen science at public libraries</strong></p> <p><strong>7.</strong> To what extent can citizen science (in its most ‘extreme’ form of participation) be imagined as an activity within the library that promotes more active user participation?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> Through for example cocreation, experimentation, and hands-on learning activities...</p> <p><strong>8. </strong>Do you think that the activity has brought new knowledge? What new knowledge has the activity brought from your perspective?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> Knowledge of the scientific process, knowledge of the community or new users...</p> <p>9. What could be the opportunities and barriers of introducing citizen science at public libraries? And the barriers?</p> <p><strong>Probe:</strong> Like for example improving the perception of the library, actively involving certain users...What could be the ‘return’ for the community? What impact can citizen science projects have on making the environment more dynamic from libraries?</p> <p><strong>10. </strong>More generally, what could be the ‘added value’ of the introduction of citizen science within the library’s range of activities?</p> <p><strong>Probe:</strong> Is it a fun activity that promotes socialization, for example? Or that allows to generate new knowledge? Or that highlights the library’s social value? Or, also, that may offer new uses and new roles to the library? Can it foster a sense of community with the library as a connector? What other impacts can be generated in your environment?</p> <p><strong>Closing</strong></p> <p><strong>11.</strong> Do you see yourselves the next year, implementing a citizen science project as part of the library’s range of activities? And adopting an existing one?</p> <p><strong>Probe: </strong>Are you motivated to get more involved with citizen science projects? What kind of projects? What level of user involvement do you expect? What barriers do you see to users’ involvement? What benefits and opportunities do you think you can bring to the library?</p> <p><strong>12.</strong> We have now reached the end of the discussion. Anyone want to add anything else?</p> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_first_phase)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [gen_1] Are you..?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_3] How old are you?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [rol_2] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user not associated with local associations</li> <li>Library technician</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [back_3] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [part_2] Have you already participated in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Motivations to participate</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [mot_us] What did motivate you to participate in the project?</p> </td> <td> <p>[open]</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards the library</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>7. [att_us_pre1] To what extent do you believe that your library is responsive to the community needs?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [att_us_pre2] To what extent to you believe your library is able to face local challenges based on users' active participation?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Confidence to perform scientific tasks</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>9. [conf_us_pre] To what extent do you feel able to contribute to perform the following scientific tasks:</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 4 [Totally]</p> </td> <td> <p>a. Formulate the research question</p> <p>b. Data collection</p> <p>c. Analysis and interpretation of the results</p> <p>d. Propose concrete actions based on scientific evidence</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Self-efficacy</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>10. [se_us_pre] To what extent do you feel able to positively contribute to the library and your community?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_second_phase)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [gen_3] Are you..?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_5] How old are you?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [rol_4] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user or technician not associated with local associations</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [back_5] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [mot_us2] To what extent are you motivated to carry out the experiment?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_last_phase)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [gen_2] Are you..?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_4] How old are you?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [rol_3] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user or technician not associated with local associations</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [back_4] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [part_3] To how many cocreation sessions have you participated?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>None</li> <li>1</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [sat_2] To what extent are you satisfied with the experiment?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards the library</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [att_us_post] To what extent do you believe that the project has positively changed your perception of the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Confidence to perform scientific tasks</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>7. [conf_us_post] To what extent do you feel able to contribute to perform the following scientific tasks:</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]</p> </td> <td> <p>a. Formulate the research question</p> <p>b. Data collection</p> <p>c. Analysis and interpretation of the results</p> <p>d. Propose concrete actions based on scientific evidence</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Perceived impact</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [imp_us] What do you believe that citizen science may bring to public libraries and users?</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <p>a. Knowledge of the scientific process</p> <p>b. New connections among participants </p> <p>c. Fun</p> <p>d. New knowledge of the local environment</p> <p>e. Scientific evidence on a common concern</p> <p>f. Social cohesion</p> <p>g. Positive attitudes towards science</p> <p>h. Willingness to learn</p> <p>i. Critical thinking and self-efficacy</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p>
Qualitative Interview Data: Users and therapists perceptions of myoelectric multi-function upper limb prostheses with direct and pattern recognition control
<p>The data uploaded here were collected in 2016/2017 through semi-structured interviews with prosthesis users and hand therapists. Participants were mainly asked about satisfaction with their prosthetic device and about activities which they perform with the prosthesis. Interviews were conducted in Dutch and German language.</p> <p>All interview data are made publicly available, except for data of prosthesis users who were experienced with pattern recognition control (n=4). Due to the small number of these participants, their interview data is only available upon reasonable request to not compromise participant privacy. </p> <p> </p>
Data for Say it aloud: Measuring change talk and user perceptions in an automated, technology-delivered adaptation of motivational interviewing delivered by video-counsellor
<p>Two of three datasets from study where participants engaged in a spoken 'dialogue' with a pre-recorded video counsellor asking open questions to promote behaviour change. </p> <p><strong>interview length and change talk results.csv</strong> reports duration of dialogue and number of instances of change talk and sustain talk detected by human coders in each participant's speech. Transcripts of participants' speech are not uploaded because we did not request participants' consent for sharing. When designing the study, we did not know if people would feel comfortable speaking aloud to the computer; we did not want to make them feel more self-conscious by knowing their speech would shared. The data are from 16 of 18 participants; two were excluded for not talking about a goal to increase physical activity, which was a requirement of the study.</p> <p>Version 1.0 contains ratings of the number of instances of change and sustain talk, which required the coder to judge when a complex statement should be scored as containing more than one instance. Version 2.0 was created in response to a reviewer's suggestion that coders should simply score the presence or absence of change and sustain talk. The new dataset presents the agreed scoring of two independent coders who scored whether change or sustain talk were present in each participant's response to each question posed by the video-counsellor. </p> <p><strong>Questionnaire Units of Analysis.docx</strong> contains participants' written responses to an evaluation questionnaire completed one week after the interview. These responses were the raw material for thematic analysis. This dataset contains responses from 18 participants, including participants 7 and 11 who did not talk about a goal of physical activity when interacting with the video-counsellor.</p> <p> </p>
Additional Resources for Understanding End-User Perception of Transfer Risks in Smart Contracts
<p>This contains further resources for the work titled "Understanding End-User Perception of Transfer Risks in Smart Contracts", which is set to appear in CHI 2025.</p> <p>This work details an investigation into user understanding of transfer risks in ERC-20 blockchain smart contracts. An example transfer risk is a user being unable to transfer due to their account being blacklisted by the owner of the contract.</p> <p>A large portion of this work focuses on the most popular Ethereum smart contract (USD Tether). This details responses to a 110-participant survey on smart contract users, establishing their knowledge of transfer risks and various other perceptions. Included also are the results of statistical tests on these responses, the follow-up message to the respondents and more.</p> <p>Another portion of this work investigates the presence of transfer risks in other top ERC-20 contracts. The results of this investigation is also found here.</p> <p>This also includes results of blockchain analytics to establish the top ERC-20 addresses, as well as code used for processing.</p>
DATA: Nonbinary Voices for Digital Assistants – An Investigation of User Perceptions and Gender Stereotypes
<p>This dataset (n=318) investigates peoples' perceptions of gender stereotypes in nonbinary digital voices.</p>
Speech, timbre, and pitch perception in cochlear implant users after chronic use with flat panel CT-based frequency reallocations
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Perception of speaker sincerity in complex social interactions by cochlear implant users
<p><span>Understanding insincere language, for example sarcasm and teasing, is a fundamental element of communication and crucial for maintaining social relationships. This can be a challenging task for cochlear implant users (CIs) who receive degraded suprasegmental information important for perceiving a speaker's attitude. We measured perception of speaker sincerity (literal positive, literal negative, sarcasm, and teasing) in 16 adults with CIs using an established video inventory. Participants were presented with audio-only and audio-visual social interactions between two people with and without supporting verbal context. They were instructed to describe the content of the conversation and answer whether the speakers meant what they said. Results showed that subjects could not always identify speaker sincerity, even when the content of the conversation was perfectly understood. This deficit was greater for perceiving insincere relative to sincere utterances. Performance improved when additional visual cues or verbal context cues were provided. Subjects who were better at perceiving the content of the interactions in the audio-only condition benefited more from having additional visual cues for judging the speaker's sincerity, suggesting that the two modalities compete for cognitive recourses. Percentage scores for understanding the content also did not correlate with that for extracting speaker sincerity, suggesting that what was said vs. how it was said were perceived using unrelated segmental versus suprasegmental cues. Our results further showed that subjects who had access to lower-order resolved harmonic information provided by a hearing aids in the contralateral ear identified speaker sincerity better than those who used implants alone. The results suggest that measuring speech recognition alone in CI users do not fully describe the outcome and our findings stress the importance of measuring social communication functions in people with CIs.</span></p>
A Formative Study to Explore the Sensory Perceptions of Vaginal Product Users
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01334827. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Examining Alcohol Consumption, Perceptions, and User Experience of Alcohol Moderation Strategies
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04286867. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Perception of speaker sincerity in complex social interactions by cochlear implant users
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Acceptability and User Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence-based Mobile Applications Adoption for Weight Management: A Sequential Explanatory Study
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05257239. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Optical Imaging and User Perception Study of Vaginal Gel
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01716000. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Perception of Intonation by Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02323932. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Assessment of a Method to Improve Cochlear Implant Users' Speech Perception in Noisy Environments While Maintaining Their Ability to Determine Where a Sound Originates From
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT07323862. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Perception biases of gender in political talk shows? A Twitter analysis of user engagement in Germany
<p><strong>Perception biases of gender in political talk shows?</strong></p> <p>This dataset contains the raw and processed data analysed in the CSS lecture at TUM. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Explanation</strong></p> <ul> <li>raw.zip: Contains the raw data structured by year it was created</li> <li>annotated_data.json: data as it was used for the analysis after filtering and combining with participant data</li> <li>participant_encoding.csv: encoded information about participants of talk shows</li> </ul>
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.