Archival Science

, Volume 11, Issue 3–4, pp 329–348 | Cite as

The application of archival concepts to a data-intensive environment: working with scientists to understand data management and preservation needs

  • Dharma Akmon
  • Ann Zimmerman
  • Morgan Daniels
  • Margaret Hedstrom
Original paper

Abstract

The collection, organization, and long-term preservation of resources are the raison d’être of archives and archivists. The archival community, however, has largely neglected science data, assuming they were outside the bounds of their professional concerns. Scientists, on the other hand, increasingly recognize that they lack the skills and expertise needed to meet the demands being placed on them with regard to data curation and are seeking the help of “data archivists” and “data curators.” This represents a significant opportunity for archivists and archival scholars but one that can only be realized if they better understand the scientific context.

Keywords

Science data Data curation Data reuse Data management Data documentation 

References

  1. Berman F (2008) Got data? A guide to data preservation in the information age. Commun ACM 51(12):50–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birnholtz JP, Bietz MJ (2003) Data at work: supporting sharing in science and engineering. Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work. Sanibel Island, FL, pp 339–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borgman CL, Wallis JC, Enyedy N (2007) Little science confronts the data deluge: habitat ecology, embedded sensor networks, and digital libraries. Int J Digit Libr 7(1–2):17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Botticelli P (2000) Records appraisal in network organizations. Archivaria 49:161–191Google Scholar
  5. Bowker G (2006) Memory practices in the sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  6. Cragin MH, Palmer CL, Carlson JR, Witt M (2010) Data sharing, small science and institutional repositories. Philos Trans R Soc A 368:4023–4038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Curry A (2011) Reuse of old data offers lesson for particle physicists. Science 331:694–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elliott CA (1974) Experimental data as a source for the history of science. Am Arch 37(1):27–35Google Scholar
  9. Feijen M (2011) What researchers want. SURF foundation, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  10. Gantz J, Reinsel D (2010) The digital universe decadeare you ready? IDC White Paper, May 2010. http://idcdocserv.com/925. Assessed 27 Feb. 2011
  11. Haas J, Samuels H, Simmons B (1985) Appraising the records of modern science and technology: a guide. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  12. Hackman L, Warnow-Blewett J (1987) The documentation strategy: a model and a case study. Am Arch 50(1):12–27Google Scholar
  13. Hey T, Tansley S, Tolle K (eds) (2009) The fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery. Microsoft Research, Redmond, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  14. King WJ (1964) The project on the history of recent physics in the United States. Am Arch 27(2):237–243Google Scholar
  15. King G (2011) Ensuring the data-rich future of the social sciences. Science 331:719–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lauriault T, Craig B, Taylor DR, Pulsifer P (2007) Today’s data are part of tomorrow’s research: Archival issues in the sciences. Archivaria 64:123–178Google Scholar
  17. Madnick S, Smith M, Clopeck K (2009) Materials science and engineering at MIT. The scientific data flood: a case study of “how much information?” http://hmi.ucsd.edu/pdf/HMI_Case_MaterialsScienEng.pdf. Accessed 16 Mar. 2011
  18. Piwowar H, Chapman W (2009) Public sharing of research datasets: a pilot study of associations. J Informetr 4(2):148–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shankar K (2007) Order from chaos: The poetics and pragmatics of scientific recordkeeping. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 58(10):1457–1466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. U.S. National Institutes of Health (2003) Data sharing policy and implementation guidance. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.htm. Accessed 15 Mar. 2011
  21. U.S. National Science Foundation (2010) Application and administration guide, Chapter IV.D.4. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/aag_6.jsp#VID4. Accessed 15 Mar. 2011
  22. Van House NA (2003) Digital libraries and collaborative knowledge construction. In: Bishop AP, Buttenfield B, Van House NA (eds) Digital library use: social practice in design and evaluation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 271–295Google Scholar
  23. Wallis J C, Borgman C L, Mayernik M, Pepe A (2008) Moving archival practices upstream: an exploration of the life cycle of ecological sensing data in collaborative field research. Int J Digit Curation, 3(1):114–126. http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/67/46. Accessed 17 Mar. 2011
  24. Warnow-Blewett J, Capitos AJ, Genuth J, Weart SR (1995) AIP study of multi-institutional collaborations: Phase I: High energy physics. Report No. 1: Summary of project activities and findings: Project recommendations. American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD. http://www.aip.org/history/pubs/collabs/hep-rp1.htm. Accessed 15 Mar. 2011
  25. Warnow-Blewett J, Genuth J, Weart SR (2001) AIP study of multi-institutional collaborations: final report: highlights and project recommendations. American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD. http://www.aip.org/history/pubs/collabs/highlights.html. Accessed 15 Mar. 2011
  26. Yin RK (2008) Case study research: Design and methods, 4th ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  27. Zimmerman A (2008) New knowledge from old data: the role of standards in the sharing and reuse of ecological data. Sci Technol Human Values 33(5):631–652Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dharma Akmon
    • 1
  • Ann Zimmerman
    • 1
  • Morgan Daniels
    • 1
  • Margaret Hedstrom
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Michigan School of InformationAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations