Hands-On Data Publishing with Researchers: Five Experiments with Metadata in Multiple Domains

  • Joana RodriguesEmail author
  • João Aguiar Castro
  • João Rocha da Silva
  • Cristina Ribeiro
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 988)


The current requirements for open data in the EU are increasing the awareness of researchers with respect to data management and data publication. Metadata is essential in research data management, namely on data discovery and reuse. Current practices tend to either leave metadata definition to researchers, or to assign their creation to curators. The former typically results in ad-hoc descriptors, while the latter follows standards but lacks specificity. In this exploratory study, we adopt a researcher-curator collaborative approach in five data publication cases, involving researchers in data description and discussing the use of both generic and domain-oriented metadata. The study shows that researchers working on familiar datasets can contribute effectively to the definition of metadata models, in addition to the actual metadata creation. The cases also provide preliminary evidence of cross-disciplinary descriptor use. Moreover, the interaction with curators highlights the advantages of data management, making researchers more open to participate in the corresponding tasks.


Research data management Data publication Metadata Dendro 



This work is financed by the ERDF - European Regional Development Fund through the Operational Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation - COMPETE 2020 Programme and by National Funds through the Portuguese funding agency, FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia within project TAIL, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016736. João Aguiar Castro is supported by research grant PD/BD/114143/2015, provided by the FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia.


  1. 1.
    Castro, J.A., et al.: Involving data creators in an ontology-based design process for metadata models. In: Developing Metadata Application Profiles, pp. 181–213 (2017).
  2. 2.
    Akers, K.G., Doty, J.: Disciplinary differences in faculty research data management practices and perspectives. Int. J. Digit. Curation 8(2), 5–26 (2013). ISSN 1746–8256Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Assante, M., et al.: Are scientific data repositories coping with research data publishing? Data Sci. J. 15 (2016).
  4. 4.
    Bergold, J., Thomas, S.: Participatory research methods: a methodological approach in motion. Forum Qual. Soc. Res. 13(1) (2012).
  5. 5.
    Cox, A.M., Pinfield, S., Smith, J.: Moving a brick building: UK libraries coping with research data management as a “wicked” problem. J. Librarianship Inf. Sci. 48(1), 3–17 (2016). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heidorn, P.B.: Shedding light on the dark data in the long tail of science. Libr. Trends 57(2), 280–299 (2008). ISSN 1559–0682Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim, Y.: Institutional and individual influences on scientists’ data sharing behaviors. The School of Information Studies - Dissertations Paper 85 3.1, p. 304 (2013). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Palmer, C.L., et al.: Site-based data curation based on hot spring geobiology. Plos One 12(3), e0172090 (2017). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Qin, J., Ball, A., Greenberg, J.: Functional and architectural requirements for metadata: supporting discovery and management of scientific data. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, pp. 62–71 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Guidelines on FAIR Data Management in Horizon 2020 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rice, R., Haywood, J.: Research data management initiatives at University of Edinburgh. Int. J. Digit. Curation 6(2), 232–244 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    da Silva, J.R., Ribeiro, C., Lopes, J.C.: Ranking Dublin Core descriptor lists from user interactions: a case study with Dublin Core Terms using the Dendro platform. Int. J. Digit. Libr. (2018). ISSN 1432-300
  13. 13.
    Silvello, G.: Theory and practice of data citation. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 69(1), 6–20 (2018). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tenopir, C., et al.: Changes in data sharing and data reuse practices and perceptions among scientists worldwide. PLos ONE 10(8), 15 (2015). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thanos, C.: Research data reusability: conceptual foundations, barriers and enabling technologies. Publications 5(1), 16 (2017). Scholar
  16. 16.
    White, H.C.: Considering personal organization: metadata practices of scientists. J. Libr. Metadata 10(2–3), 156–172 (2010). Scholar
  17. 17.
    White, H.C.: Descriptive metadata for scientific data repositories: a comparison of information scientist and scientist organizing behaviors. J. Libr. Metadata 14(1), 24–51 (2014). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Willis, C., Greenberg, J., White, H.: Analysis and synthesis of metadata goals for scientific data. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 63(8), 1505–1520 (2012). Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yoon, A.: Red flags in data: learning from failed data reuse experiences. Proc. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 53(1), 1–6 (2016). ISSN 23739231MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering of the University of PortoINESC TECPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations