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.
32
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
32 results for “information sharing”
Shared neural codes for visual and semantic information about familiar faces in a common representational space
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
[Supplementary Information] Can LCA be FAIR? – Assessing the status quo and opportunities for FAIR data sharing
<p>This is the supplementary information related to a the manuscript - 'Can LCA be FAIR?' - Assessing the status quo and opportunities for FAIR data sharing. The purpose of this study is to assess the status quo of data sharing in LCA in relation to the FAIR data principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Re-use).</p><p>The supplementary information consists of three files:</p><p><strong>SI 1</strong> - How the life cycle inventory is shared in relation to the FAIR data principles in 25 peer reviewed LCA journal articles between 2018 -2022.</p><p><strong>SI 2</strong> - Review of ten data management plans of EU Horizon Europe projects in relation to LCA to assess the recommendations on the implementation of FAIR principles.</p>
The Role of Informal Communication in Building Shared Understanding of Non-Functional Requirements in Remote Continuous Software Engineering
<p><strong>Study Information</strong></p> <p>We conducted an ethnography-informed case study of a remote software organization that adopts CSE practices to explore how the organization builds a shared understanding of NFRs. Our study uses semi-structured interviews with a period of observations to answer the following research questions:</p> <p> </p> <ol> <li> <p>How does a remote software organization that adopts CSE practices reach a shared understanding of NFRs?</p> </li> <li> <p>What are the limitations to the shared understanding of NFRs in a remote software organization that adopts CSE practices?</p> </li> <li> <p>What organizational practices for remote collaboration supported a shared understanding of NFRs?</p> </li> </ol> <p> </p> <p>In our study, we refer to our partner organization as Alpha. We used ethnography-informed methods to study Alpha's practices and processes and how they approach a shared understanding of NFRs in their product development. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Data Analysis</strong></p> <p>We performed a qualitative study through semi-structured interviews and observations. We use the open, axial and selective coding approach from grounded theory [1] to create our codebook, which informed the results and discussion of our study. Two independent coders held agreement sessions to discuss the codes, consolidate the codes and calculate the inter-rater reliability using the Cohen Kappa's coefficient for measuring observer agreement for categorical data [2]. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Artifact Descriptions</strong></p> <p>Our replication package contains three artifacts:</p> <p>1. Codebook.csv: The codebook contains rows for the list of codes used, including the code name and the description of the codes. The codes are the final set of themes derived during the thematic analysis of the interview responses. For example, 'Gaps in communication' means when interview participants describe miscommunications due to team members making assumptions about a project/process or having unclear expectations for a project.</p> <p>2. kappa-scores.csv: This contains the associated kappa values for each round of inter-rater agreement sessions. For each agreement session, the Cohen Kappa's coefficient was calculated from the number of agreements and disagreements of codes within one or two interview transcripts. The Kappa values represent the level of agreement ranging from 0 to 1, where > 0.6 represents substantial agreement. </p> <p>3. Interview-questions.csv: This contains the interview questions used in the semi-structured interviews. Some of the interview questions varied depending on the interviewee’s role, experience and the flow of the interviews.</p> <p><strong> </strong></p> <p><strong>Usefulness</strong></p> <p>We recognize that the value and usefulness of our replication package are yet-to-be-determined. In the interest of transparency of open science, we published our artifacts. We hope that these artifacts are useful to either replicate our findings or to further analyze them to produce other enlightening results.</p> <p><strong> </strong></p> <p><strong>References</strong></p> <p>1. Rashina Hoda, James Noble, and Stuart Marshall. "Grounded theory for geeks". In: Proceedings of the 18th conference on pattern languages of programs. 2011, pp. 1–17.</p> <p>2. J Richard Landis and Gary G Koch. "The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data". In: biometrics (1977), pp. 159–174.</p> <p><strong> </strong></p> <p> </p>
Questionnaire data to research small-scale farmers' information sharing for adapting to climate change in Mozambique (2019-2020)
<p>Data collected from individual questionnaires with local communities of 4 districts of Mozambique in November 2019 and July 2020. It contains as well data from nine individual questionnaires to institutions (government and NGOs) working with local communities for their development.</p> <p>Data are replies from interviews containing open and closed questions about a) climate change adaptation options necessary for Mozambican small scale farmers, about b) the most used and preferred information sources of farmers, about c) the main barriers for a better exchange of information, and about d) proposals for improving it. The questionnaire can be consulted in Appendix A (in English and Portuguese). The open questions had the purpose to understand the causes and explanations about the themes presented. The closed questions followed a 0-5 likert scale approach, where 5 meant a very important factor and 0 non important one. This format was pursued for developing statistical analysis and comparison between the different types of participants. We used the same questions and format for interviewing farmers and stakeholders, although the questionnaire for farmers included also personal aspects like gender, age, and education.</p>
Participatory Conceptual Diagrams to research small-scale farmers´ information sharing for adapting to climate change in Mozambique
<p>Data collected from focus groups discussions with local communities of 4 distrcits of Mozambique in November 2019. The data are a series of conceptual maps describing a) the farming practices improvements most needed to adapt to climate change, and b) the most useful information for enabling the selected improvements, the most effective information sharing sources - e.g. institutional actors, members of the community, technical support, etc. - and means of communication - e.g. radio, mobile phone, word-of-mouth, etc. For the second purpose, connections were drawn by the members of the community between information sources and the actions needed for climate change adaptation. Participants also assigned a weight to the connections, selecting between: strong, medium or a weak connection.</p> <p>Notes about the discussions and opinions expressed by participants, written down by the research team, are also included.</p> <p>Together with the data, PDF files describing metadata and detailed methodology followed are included.</p>
Results of the poll in the study "Information Scientists' Motivations for Research Data Sharing and Reuse"
<p>This is a dataset with results of the poll conducted in the study “Information Scientists’ Motivations for Research Data Sharing and Reuse”.</p> <p>In terms of the Uses and Gratifications Theory (Questions 1 and 2), the most popular uses relate to the categories of research support and information. Researchers share, or would share, their research data in general for any reusability purposes and especially for combination of different datasets to produce new evidence. Also, the vast majority of study participants associate research data sharing with possibilities to accelerate scientific progress and to increase research efficiency. In case of research data reuse, all the researchers indicated that they use, or would use, others’ data first of all for inspiration. Interestingly, study participants put relatively high the category of recognition in case of sharing, but at the same time they do not associate increased recognition among colleagues and other researchers with research data reuse. The remaining categories belonging to the categories of self-esteem and social interaction, i.e. increased citation level and visibility of the research as well as enhanced scientific reputation, possible cooperations and co-authorship, were selected only by few respondents. Also remarkably, data reuse is more frequently linked to entertainment then data sharing. </p> <p>In terms of the Self-Determination Theory (Questions 3 and 4), all but one of the interviewees indicated that they have shared or would share their research data because it can accelerate scientific progress which they consider important and would like to contribute to it (i.e., identified regulation). The second most popular motivation turned out to be the obligation by employer, project funder and/or journals (i.e., external regulation). The third most popular option was social influence, i.e. because many other researchers participate in data sharing and they feel obligated to do the same (i.e., external regulation).This way, the participants demonstrate a mixture of identified motivation and external regulation, both material and social. In the case of data reuse, the participants demonstrate more homogeneous results with identification and intrinsic motivation having most of the votes. The role of external regulation seems to be much less important as in the case with data sharing. So, researchers reuse, or would reuse, research data because it can accelerate scientific progress which is important for them. Additionally, researchers enjoy exploring and using third party research data. Thus, interviewees participate or would participate in data sharing because they consider it important, but also feel or are obliged to do so. At the same time, study participants do not feel pressure from outside when deciding whether to reuse data or not.</p> <p>For more information about the study and its results, please read the article “Information Scientists’ Motivations for Research Data Sharing and Reuse” by Shutsko and Stock (2023).</p>
I'm not a doctor, but I know the basics: Share information, not medication. (Mimi sio daktari, lakini nafahamu mambo ya msingi. Sambaza taarifa, sio dawa.).
<p>Video in Swahili with English subtitles, containing an example of friends discussing recent experiences of illness and giving advice/information on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR). </p> <p>Video produced as part of a Participatory Action Research Workshop with young professionals in Mwanza, Tanzania to create public health messages on Antimicrobial Resistance in a post-COVID East Africa in June 2022. This builds off of the data gathered in two international, interdisciplinary research projects (HATUA - Holistic Approaches to Understanding Antimicrobial Resistance in East Africa and CARE - COVID-19 and Antimicrobial Resistance in East Africa – Impact and Response), seeking to understand the wider medical and societal drivers of AMR in East Africa and identify possible interventions to curb the spread of AMR. The workshop ran for 9 days over a 3 week period and consisted of focus group style discussions with participants to explore issues surrounding AMR, antibiotic use, and public health messaging awareness in local communities (Days 1-2),participant-led design of poster, radio, and video messages with feedback from the research team and introduction to filming/recording equipment (days 3-4), filming, shooting and recording materials within local settings in Mwanza with participants serving as actors, directors, and crew with guidance from research team (days 4-8) and a final in-person review and hands-on feedback of preliminary mock-ups of posters and videos (day 9). Participants have continued to collaborate via email and WhatsApp as materials were finalised. </p> <p>Reflexive self-critique: Video and sound quality are a reflection of the participatory approach to producing materials. We are also acknowledge that there are issues which could have been highlighted in greater detail, particularly considering the post-COVID context e.g., using hand sanitiser and social distancing, for example. Character also emphasises having knowledge despite not being a doctor, which could undermine the importance of other healthcare professionals in spreading critical and reliable public health information. </p> <p>Correspondence: kjf4@st-andrews.ac.uk; mgk@st-andrews.ac.uk</p>
Simulation Results to Analyse the Benefits of Information Sharing - Dataset
<p>This is a data set used to obtain the results described in the paper "Shall We Collaborate? A Model to Analyse the Benefits of Information Sharing" published in the proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Information Sharing and Collaborative Security (WISCS 2016), Vienna, Austria, 2016.</p>
Data of "Using current research information systems to investigate data acquisition and data sharing practices of computer scientists"
<p>This study describes a methodology where departmental academic publications are used to analyse the ways in which computer scientists share research data.</p> <p>Without sufficient information about researchers’ data sharing, there is a risk of mismatching FAIR data service efforts with the needs of researchers. This study describes a methodology where departmental academic publications are used to analyse the ways in which computer scientists share research data. The advancement of FAIR data would benefit from novel methodologies that reliably examine data sharing at the level of multidisciplinary research organisations. Studies that use CRIS publication data to elicit insight into researchers’ data sharing may therefore be a valuable addition to the current interview and questionnaire methodologies.</p> <p><strong>Data was collected from the following sources:</strong></p> <p>All journal articles published by researchers in the computer science department of the case study’s university during 2019 were extracted for scrutiny from the current research information system. For these 193 articles, a coding framework was developed to capture the key elements of acquiring and sharing research data. Article DOIs are included in the research data.</p> <p>The scientific journal articles and theirs DOIs are used in this study for the purpose of academic expression.</p> <p>The raw data is compiled into a single CSV file. Rows represent specific articles and columns are the values of the data points described below. Author names and affiliations were not collected and are not included in the data set. </p> <p> </p> <p>The following data points were used in the analysis:</p> <p><strong>Data points</strong></p> <ul> <li><strong>Main study types</strong></li> <li>Literature-based study (e.g. literature reviews, archive studies, studies of social media)</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Novel computational methods (e.g. algorithms, simulations, software)</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Interaction studies (e.g, interviews, surveys, tasks, ethnography)</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Intervention studies (e.g., EEG, MRI, clinical trials)</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Measurement studies (e.g. astronomy, weather, acoustics, chemistry)</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Life sciences (e.g. “omics”, ecology)</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li><strong>Data acquisition</strong></li> <li>Article presents a data availability statement</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Article does not utilise data</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Original data was collected</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Open data from prior studies were used</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Open data from public authorities, companies, universities and associations</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li><strong>Data sharing</strong></li> <li>Article does not use original data</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Data of the article is not available for reuse</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Article used openly available data</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Authors agree to share their data to interested readers</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Article shared data (or part of) as supplementary material</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Article shared data (or part of) via open deposition</li> <li>yes/no</li> <li>Article deposited code or used open code</li> <li>yes/no</li> </ul>
Data from: Sharing detection heterogeneity information among species in community models of occupancy and abundance can strengthen inference
<p>1. The estimation of abundance and distribution and factors governing patterns in these parameters is central to the field of ecology. The continued development of hierarchical models that best utilize available information to inform these processes is a key goal of quantitative ecologists. However, much remains to be learned about simultaneously modeling true abundance, presence, and trajectories of ecological communities.</p> <p>2. Simultaneous modeling of the population dynamics of multiple species provides an interesting mechanism to examine patterns in community processes and, as we emphasize herein, to improve species-specific estimates by leveraging detection information among species. Here we demonstrate a simple but effective approach to share information about observation parameters among species in hierarchical community abundance and occupancy models, where we use shared random effects among species to account for spatiotemporal heterogeneity in detection probability.</p> <p>3. We demonstrate the efficacy of our modeling approach using simulated abundance data, where we recover well our simulated parameters using N-mixture models. Our approach substantially increases precision in estimates of abundance compared to models that do not share detection information among species. We then expand this model, and apply it to repeated detection/non-detection data collected on six species of tits (Paridae) breeding at 119 1 km<sup>2</sup> sampling sites across a <em>P. montanus</em> hybrid zone in northern Switzerland (2004-2020). We find strong impacts of forest cover and elevation on population persistence and colonisation in all species. We also demonstrate evidence for interspecific competition on population persistence and colonization probabilities, where the presence of marsh tits reduces population persistence and colonisation probability of sympatric willow tits, potentially decreasing gene flow among willow tit subspecies.</p> <p>4. While conceptually simple, our results have important implications for the future modeling of population abundance, colonization, persistence, and trajectories in community frameworks. We suggest potential extensions of our modeling in this paper, and discuss how leveraging data from multiple species can improve model performance and sharpen ecological inference.</p>
An in-silico analysis of information sharing systems for adaptable resources management: a case study of oyster farmers
<p>Model and data outcomes --> We developed an agent-based models involving oyster farmers sharing information to adapt to an ill-understood virus. Various scenarios of heterogeneity and information sharing (through social networks and centralized information system) are simulated.</p>
Data for "Information sharing within a social network is key to behavioral flexibility – lessons from mice tested under semi-naturalistic conditions"
<p>Data for "Information sharing within a social network is key to behavioral flexibility – lessons from mice tested under semi-naturalistic conditions", currently under review in Science Advances. </p>
Data from: Sharing detection heterogeneity information among species in community models of occupancy and abundance can strengthen inference
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Online Companion: A Preference Informed Energy Sharing Framework for a Centralized Energy Community
<p>This manuscript serves as an electronic companion to [1]. We present the complementary input data, including prosumers target demand, PV power generation, and electricity market prices.</p><p> </p><p> </p>
Effect of shared information on food behaviour: a holistic approach in Dutch consumers
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Datasheet literatur cyber law information sharing
<p>berikut datasheet literatur cyber law information sharing</p>
Improving Shared-Decision Making in the Intensive Care Unit Using Patient-reported Outcome Information
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05155150. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
GoalKeeper: Intelligent Information Sharing for Children With Medical Complexity
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03620071. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 2.
Data from: The spatial dynamics of predators and the benefits and costs of sharing information
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Improving the Process of Shared Decision-Making by Integrating Online Structured Information and Self-Assessment Tools
<p>Data of the SDM cases.</p>
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.