Researchers' data processing descriptions—Understanding paradata creation practices and their underpinning instrumentalities.
Researchers increasingly share data, both on their own initiative and as a result of requirements by funding agencies and publishers. For data to be accessible and reusable, it must be understandable. While typical metadata covers rudimentary information about data, data re‐users often need more con...
| Publicado en: | Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology Vol. 76; no. 11; pp. 1570 - 1591 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Nov2025
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=188926889&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 188926889 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 23301635 H6JN jtl: Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology issn: 23301635 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Nov2025 vid: 76 iid: 11 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 188926889 187133929 188926889 188926889 10.1002/asi.70003 188926889 ppf: 1570 ppct: 21 formats: tig: atl: Researchers' data processing descriptions—Understanding paradata creation practices and their underpinning instrumentalities. aug: au: Huvila, Isto Andersson, Lisa Sköld, Olle affil: Department of ALM, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden sug: subj: Research Personnel Psychosocial Factors Data Collection Methods Information Management Anthropology Documentation Metadata Human Funding Source Semi-Structured Interview Professional Practice Decision Making Publishing Research Methodology Data Management Qualitative Studies Videoconferencing Descriptive Statistics Academic Medical Centers Purposive Sample Theoretical Sample Thematic Analysis ab: Researchers increasingly share data, both on their own initiative and as a result of requirements by funding agencies and publishers. For data to be accessible and reusable, it must be understandable. While typical metadata covers rudimentary information about data, data re‐users often need more contextual information, including paradata informative of data‐related practices and processes. To better understand the practices and types of data descriptions researchers produce, this paper analyzes 33 interviews with researchers and professionals working with archeological data in different capacities. We identified five data description practices: (1) prescribing, (2) keeping track, (3) describing (of what was done (processes); of structures, techniques, methods; of principles, rationales, decisions; of limitations of data), (4) flagging, and (5) publishing, formatting, and making available. A part evinces integrated paradata creation where paradata generation is tightly incorporated in the enactment of specific research methods, and a part standalone paradata creation prompted by aspirations to produce specific types of outputs. The findings suggest that underpinning instrumentalities, and the extent to which paradata creation is integral to research practice is central when developing means to support paradata generation, identifying where to find and how to manage it. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|