Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fostering Research Data Management in Collaborative Research Contexts: Lessons learnt from an ‘Embedded’ Evaluation of ‘Data Story’

  • ECSCW Contribution
  • Published:
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent studies suggest that RDM practices are not yet properly integrated into daily research workflows, nor supported by any tools researchers typically use. To help close this gap, we have elaborated a design concept called ‘Data Story’ drawing on ideas from (digital) data storytelling and aiming at facilitating the appropriation of RDM practices, in particular data curation, sharing and reuse. Our focus was on researchers working mainly with qualitative data in their daily workflows. Data Story integrates traditional data curation approaches with a more narrative, contextual, and collaborative organizational layer that can be thought of as a ‘story’. Our findings come from a long-term ‘embedded’ evaluation of the concept and show that: (1) engaging with Data Story has many potential benefits, as for example peer learning opportunities, better data overview, and organization of analytical insights; (2) Data Story can effectively address data curation issues such as standardization and unconformity; and (3) it addresses a broader set of issues and concerns that are less dealt with in the current state of play such as lack of motivation and stylistic choices. Our contribution, based on lessons learnt, is to provide a new design approach for RDM and for new collaborative research data practices, one grounded in narrative structures, capable of negotiating between top-down policies and bottom-up practices, and which supports ‘reflective’ learning opportunities – with and about data – of many kinds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. https://zenodo.org/

  2. https://datadryad.org/stash

  3. https://dataverse.no

  4. https://www.qualiservice.org/de/

  5. https://www.gesis.org/en/research/research-data-management

  6. https://www.re3data.org/repository/r3d100011062

  7. CRCs can be funded for up to twelve years across three separate evaluation stages (Phase I; Phase II and Phase III). Our CRC started in January 2016 and completed its first funding period in December 2019. A second phase began in January 2020 (funded until December 2023). All CRC’s projects are interdisciplinary in nature.

References

  • Allen, Christopher; and David M. A. Mehler (2019). Correction: Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. PLOS Biology, vol. 17, no. 12: e3000587. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000587

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, Danika; Leighann E. Kimble; Bejoy Nambiar; Gareth Parry; Ashish Jha; Vijay Kumar Chattu; M Rashad Massoud; and Don Goldmann (2018). A framework for learning about improvement: embedded implementation and evaluation design to optimize learning. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, vol. 30, no. suppl_1, pp. 10–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzy008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, Jo; Yu-Wei Lin; and Paula Goodale (2016). Data journeys: Capturing the socio-material constitution of data objects and flows. Big Data & Society, vol. 3, no. 2. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716654502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Begley, C. Glenn; and Lee M. Ellis (2012). Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature, vol. 483, no. 7391, pp. 531–533. https://doi.org/10.1038/483531a

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bejarano, Carolina Alonso; Lucia Lopez Juárez; Mirian A. Mijangos García; and Daniel M. Goldstein (2019). Decolonizing ethnography: Undocumented immigrants and new directions in social science. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Birnholtz, Jeremy P.; and Matthew J. Bietz (2003). Data at work: Supporting sharing in science and engineering. In M. Pendergast, K. Schmidt, C. Simone and M. Tremaine (eds): GROUP’03: Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, FL, United States, 9–12 November 2003. New York: ACM Press, pp. 339–348. https://doi.org/10.1145/958160.958215

  • Borgman, Christine L. (2010). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgman, Christine L. (2012). The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 1059–1078. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgman, Christine L. (2015). Big data, little data, no data. Scholarship in the networked world. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

  • Borgman, Christine L.; Andrea Scharnhorst; and Milena S. Golshan (2019). Digital data archives as knowledge infrastructures: Mediating data sharing and reuse. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 888–904. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, Evelyn M.; and Ann W. Fales (1983). Reflective learning: Key to learning from experience. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 99–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chawinga, Winner Dominic; and Sandy Zinn (2020). Research data management at a public university in Malawi: the role of “three hands”. Library Management, vol. 41, nos. 6–7, pp. 467–485. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-03-2020-0042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, Fred (1994). Removing confusion about formative and summative evaluation: Purpose versus time. Evaluation and Program Planning, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(94)90017-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao, Tiffany C. (2014). Enhancing metadata for research methods in data curation. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2014.14505101103

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Concannon, Shauna; Natasha Rajan; Parthiv Shah; Davy Smith; Marian Ursu; and Jonathan Hook (2020). Brooke Leave Home: Designing a Personalized Film to Support Public Engagement with Open Data. In: CHI’20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 April 2020. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376462

  • Cox, Andrew; and Eddy Verbaan (2018). Exploring research data management. London, UK: Facet publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Collaboration, Open Science (2012). An open, large-scale, collaborative effort to estimate the reproducibility of psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 657–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612462588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cragin, Melissa H.; Carole L. Palmer; Jacob R. Carlson; and Michael Witt (2010). Data Sharing, Small Science and Institutional Repositories. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, no. 368, vol. 1926, pp. 4023–38. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0165

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Curdt, Constanze; and Dirk Hoffmeister (2015). Research data management services for a multidisciplinary, collaborative research project: Design and implementation of the TR32DB project database. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 494–512. https://doi.org/10.1108/PROG-02-2015-0016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DCN (2023). Data Curation Network: Ethical, Reusable, Better. Available at: https://datacurationnetwork.org. Accessed: 17th Feb 2023.

  • Dix, A. (2009). Within bounds and between domains: Reflecting on Making Tea within the context of design elicitation methods. International journal of human-computer studies, 67(4), 313-323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dykes, Brent (2015). Data storytelling: What it is and how it can be used to effectively communicate analysis results. Applied Marketing Analytics, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 299–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duarte, Nancy (2019). Data Story: Explain data and inspire action through story. Ideapress Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donner, Eva Katharina (2022). Research data management systems and the organization of universities and research institutes: A systematic literature review. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, vol. 0, no. 0. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211070282

  • Dourish, Paul; and Edgar Gómez Cruz (2018). Datafication and data fiction: Narrating data and narrating with data. Big Data & Society, vol. 5, no. 2. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718784083

  • Downey, Greg; Kristin R. Eschenfelder; and Kalpana Shankar (2019). Talking about metadata labor: Social science data archives, professional data librarians, and the founding of IASSIST. Historical studies in computing, information, and society: Insights from the flatiron lectures. In W. Aspray (ed): History of Computing. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 83–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18955-6_5.

  • Eberhard, Igor; and Wolfgang Kraus (2018). Der Elefant im Raum. Ethnographisches Forschungsdatenmanagement als Herausforderung für Repositorien. Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 41–52. https://doi.org/10.31263/voebm.v71i1.2018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, Paul N.; Steven J. Jackson; Melissa K. Chalmers; Geoffrey C. Bowker; Christine L. Borgman; David Ribes; Matt Burton; and Calvert Scout (2013). Knowledge Infrastructures: Intellectual Frameworks and Research Challenges. Ann Arbor: Deep Blue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erete, Sheena; Emily Ryou; Geoff Smith; Khristina Marie Fassett; and Sarah Duda (2016). Storytelling with Data: Examining the Use of Data by Non-Profit Organizations. In: CSCW’16: Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, San Francisco CA, USA, 27 February – 2 March 2016. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1273–1283. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2820068

  • European Union n.d. Research and Innovation on Open Science https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/our-digital-future/open-science_en. Accessed January 2023.

  • Fecher, Benedikt; Sascha Friesike; Marcel Hebing; and Stephanie Linek (2017). A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data. Palgrave Communications, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, Shelley, and Linda Shaw. (2019). The epistemological and ethical challenges of archiving and sharing qualitative data. American Behavioral Scientist 63, no. 6, pp. 699–721

  • Feger, Sebastian S.; Sünje Dallmeier-Tiessen; Albrecht Schmidt; and Paweł W. Woźniak (2019). Designing for Reproducibility: A Qualitative Study of Challenges and Opportunities in High Energy Physics. In: CHI’19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 4–9 May 2019. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300685

  • Feger, Sebastian S.; Paweł W. Wozniak; Lars Lischke; and Albrecht Schmidt (2020). “Yes, I comply!” Motivations and Practices around Research Data Management and Reuse across Scientific Fields. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 4, no. CSCW2, pp. 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3415212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feger, Sebastian S.; Paweł W. Woźniak; Jasmin Niess; and Albrecht Schmidt (2021). Tailored Science Badges: Enabling New Forms of Research Interaction. DIS’21: Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021, pp. 576–588. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462067

  • Fekete, Jean-Daniel (2004). The InfoVis Toolkit. In: INFO VIS’04: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, Austin, TX, USA, 10–12 October 2004. New York: IEEE Press, pp. 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1109/INFVIS.2004.64

  • Fekete, Jean-Daniel; Jarke J. van Wijk; John T. Stasko; and Chris North (2008). The value of information visualization. In A. Kerren; J.T. Stasko; JD. Fekete; and C. North (eds): Information Visualization. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 1–18.

  • Finholt, Thomas A. (2002). Collaboratories. Annual review of information science and technology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 73–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortun, Mike; Lindsay Poirier; Alli Morgan; Brian Callahan; and Kim Fortun (2021). What’s so Funny ‘bout PECE, TAF, and Data Sharing? In D. Boyer; and G. Marcus (eds): Collaborative Anthropology Today: A Collection of Exceptions. Ithaca, New York, USA: Cornell University Press.

  • Garza, Kristian; Carole Goble; John Brooke; and Caroline Jay (2015). Framing the community data system interface. In: British HCI’15: Proceedings of the 2015 British Human Computer Interaction Conference, Lincoln Lincolnshire, United Kingdom, 13–17 July 2015. New York: ACM press, pp. 269–270.

  • Gebru, Timnit; Jamie Morgenstern; Briana Vecchione; Jennifer Wortman Vaughan; Hanna Wallach; Hal Daumé Iii; and Kate Crawford (2021). Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM, vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1145/3458723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, William; and Andrew Brown (2009). Working with qualitative data. Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grudin, Jonathan (1988). Why CSCW applications fail: problems in the design and evaluation of organizational interfaces. In: CSCW’88: Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Portland, Oregon, USA, 26–28 September 1988. New York: ACM Press, pp. 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1145/62266.62273

  • Hamad, Faten; Maha Al-Fadel; and Aman Al-Soub (2021). Awareness of Research Data Management Services at Academic Libraries in Jordan: Roles, Responsibilities and Challenges. New Review of Academic Librarianship, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2019.1691027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irani, Lilly (2010). HCI on the move: methods, culture, values. IN: CHI EA’10: CHI’10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 10–15 April 2010. New York: ACM Press, pp. 2939–2942. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753846.1753890

  • Jahnke, Lori M.; and Andrew Asher (2012). The Problem of Data: Data Management and Curation Practices Among University Researchers. CLIR: Council on Library and Information Resources https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub154/problem-of-data/. Accessed 8 November 2022.

  • Jenness, Valerie (2018). Pluto, prisons, and plaintiffs: Notes on systematic back-translation from an embedded researcher. Social Problems, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 1-22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, Lisa R., Jake Carlson, Cynthia Hudson-Vitale, Heidi Imker, Wendy Kozlowski, Robert Olendorf, Claire Stewart, et al. 2018. “Data Curation Network: A Cross-Institutional Staffing Model for Curating Research Data.” International Journal of Digital Curation, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 125–40. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v13i1.616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jirotka, Marina; Charlotte Lee; and Gary Olson. (2013). Supporting Scientific Collaboration: Methods, Tools and Concepts.The Journal of Collaborative Computing and Work Practices, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 667–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-012-9184-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Jialun Aaron; Kandrea Wade; Casey Fiesler; and Jed R. Brubaker (2021) Supporting serendipity: Opportunities and challenges for Human-AI Collaboration in qualitative analysis. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 5, no. CSCW1, pp. 1-23

  • Kaltenbrunner, Wolfgang (2017). Digital infrastructure for the humanities in Europe and the US: Governing scholarship through coordinated tool development. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 275–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-017-9272-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaye, Joseph 'Jofish’ (2007). Evaluating experience-focused HCI. CHI EA’07: CHI’07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, 28 April – 3 May 2007. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1661–1664. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1240877

  • Kervin, Karina; Robert B. Cook; and William K. Michener (2014). The Backstage Work of Data Sharing. In S. Goggins; I. Jahnke; D. W. McDonald; and P. Bjørn (eds): GROUP’14: Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA, 9 – 12 November 2014. New York: ACM Press, pp. 152–156. https://doi.org/10.1145/2660398.2660406

  • Khan, Nushrat; Mike Thelwall; and Kayvan Kousha (2021). Are data repositories fettered? A survey of current practices, challenges and future technologies. Online Information Review, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 483–502. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-04-2021-0204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knaflic, Cole Nussbaumer (2015). Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Koesten, Laura; Emilia, Kacprzak; Jeni Tennison; and Elena Simperl (2019). Collaborative Practices with Structured Data: Do Tools Support What Users Need? In: CHI’19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 4–9 May 2019. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300330

  • Koesten, Laura; and Elena Simperl (2021). UX of data: making data available doesn’t make it usable. Interactions, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 97–99. https://doi.org/10.1145/3448888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korn, Matthias, Marén Schorch, Volkmar Pipek, Matthew Bietz, Carsten Østerlund, Rob Procter, David Ribes, and Robin Williams. (2017) E-infrastructures for research collaboration: The case of the social sciences and humanities. In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing pp.415–420

  • Lallé, Sébastien; and Cristina Conati (2019). The role of user differences in customization: A case study in personalization for infovis-based content. In: IUI’19: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Marina del Ray, California, 17–20 March 2019. New York: ACM Press, pp. 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1145/3301275.3302283

  • Ledo, David; Steven Houben; Jo Vermeulen; Nicolai Marquardt; Lora Oehlberg; and Saul Greenberg (2018). Evaluation strategies for HCI toolkit research. In: CHI’18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173610

  • Lee, Jae W.; Jianting Zhang; Ann S. Zimmerman; and Angelo Lucia (2009). DataNet: An emerging cyberinfrastructure for sharing, reusing and preserving digital data for scientific discovery and learning. AIChE Journal, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 2757-2764. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.12085

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leonelli, Sabina; and Niccolò Tempini (2020). Data journeys in the sciences. Springer Nature.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Susan J.; and Andrew J. Russell (2011). Being embedded: A way forward for ethnographic research. Ethnography, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 398–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138110393786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linne, Monika; and Wolfgang Zenk-Möltgen (2017). Strengthening institutional data management and promoting data sharing in the social and economic sciences. LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 58–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Shixia; Weiwei Cui; Yingcai Wu; and Mengchen Liu (2014). A survey on information visualization: recent advances and challenges. Visual Computer, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 1373–1393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-013-0892-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, Craig M.; and Michael E. Atwood (2013). Changing perspectives on evaluation in HCI: past, present, and future. CHI EA’13: CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Paris, France, 27 April – 2 May 2013. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1969–1978. https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468714

  • Mackay, Wendy E.; Caroline Appert; Michel Beaudouin-Lafon; Olivier Chapuis; Yangzhou Du; Jean-Daniel Fekete; and Yves Guiard. (2007). Touchstone: exploratory design of experiments. In: CHI’07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, California, USA, 28 April – 3 May 2007. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1425–1434. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240840

  • Martinez-Maldonado, Roberto; Vanessa Echeverria; Gloria Fernandez Nieto; and Simon Buckingham Shum (2020). From Data to Insights: A Layered Storytelling Approach for Multimodal Learning Analytics. In: CHI’20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 April 2020. New York: ACM Press, pp 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376148

  • Mayernik, Matthew S (2016). Research data and metadata curation as institutional issues. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 973-993. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Méndez, Gonzalo Gabriel; UtaHinrichs; and Miguel A. Nacenta (2017). Bottom-up vs. Top-down: Trade-offs in efficiency, understanding, freedom and creativity with infovis tools. In: CHI’17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, Colorado, USA, 6–11 May 2017. New York: ACM Press, pp. 841–852. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025942

  • Moreau, Katherine A.; Kaylee Eady; Lindsey Sikora; and Tanya Horsley (2018). Digital storytelling in health professions education: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1320-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosconi, Gaia; Qinyu Li; Dave Randall; Helena Karasti; Peter Tolmie; Jana Barutzky; Matthias Korn; and Volkmar Pipek (2019). Three Gaps in Opening Science. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 28, no. 3–4, pp. 749–789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-019-09354-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosconi, Gaia; Dave Randall; Helena Karasti; Saja Aljuneidi; Tong Yu; Peter Tolmie; and Volkmar Pipek (2022). Designing a Data Story: A Storytelling Approach to Curation and Sharing in Support of Ethnographically-driven Research. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 6, no. CSCW2, Article 289 (November 2022).

  • Muller Michael J.; and Sandra Kogan (2010). Grounded Theory Method in Human Computer Interaction and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. In J. A. Jacko (ed): Human Computer Interaction Handbook. Boca Raton: CRC Press, pp. 1003–1024.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neang, Andrew B.; Will Sutherland, Michael W. Beach; and Charlotte P. Lee (2020). Data Integration as Coordination: The Articulation of Data Work in an Ocean Science Collaboration. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 4, no. CSCW3, Article 256 (December 2020), 25 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3432955

  • Nielsen, Jakob (1993). Usability Engineering. Morgan-Kaufmann, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, Gary M.; Ann Zimmerman; and Nathan Bos (2008). Scientific Collaboration on the Internet. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262151207.001.0001

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Pantazos, Kostas; and Søren Lauesen (2012). Constructing visualizations with InfoVis tools: An evaluation from a user perspective. In: GRAPP 2012 IVAPP 2012: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications and International Conference on Information Visualization Theory and Applications, Rome, Italy, 24–26 February 2012. pp. 731–736.

  • Pasquetto, Irene V.; Ashley E. Sands; and Christine L. Borgman (2015). Exploring openness in data and science: What is “open,” to whom, when, and why? Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 1–2https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2015.1450520100141

  • Pepper, Coral; and Helen Wildy (2009). Using narratives as a research strategy. Qualitative Research Journal, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 18–26. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinfield, Stephen; Andrew M. Cox; and Jen Smith (2014). Research data management and libraries: Relationships, activities, drivers and influences. PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 12, e114734. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114734

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Poirier, Lindsay (2017). Devious design: Digital infrastructure challenges for experimental ethnography. Design Issues, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00440

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Preuss, Nils; Georg Staudter; Moritz Weber; Reiner Anderl; and Peter F. Pelz (2018). Methods and technologies for research-and metadata management in collaborative experimental research. Applied Mechanics and Materials, vol. 885, pp. 170–183. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.885.170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pryor, Graham (2014). Who’s doing data? A spectrum of roles, responsibilities, and competencies. In G. Pryor; S. Jones; A. Whyte (eds): Delivering Research Data Management Services: Fundamentals of Good Practice. London, UK: Facet Publishing, pp. 41–58.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pryor, Graham; Sarah Jones; and Angus Whyte (2013). Options and approaches to RDM service provision. In G. Pryor; S. Jones; A. Whyte (eds): Delivering Research Data Management Services: Fundamentals of Good Practice. London, UK: Facet Publishing, pp. 21–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remy, Christian; Oliver Bates; Alan Dix; Vanessa Thomas; Mike Hazas; Adrian Friday; and Elaine M. Huang (2018). Evaluation beyond usability: Validating sustainable HCI research. In: CHI’18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal QC, Canada, 21–26 April, 2018. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173790

  • RfII (2016). German Council for Scientific Information Infrastructures: Enhancing Research Data Management: Performance through Diversity. Recommendations regarding structures, processes, and financing for research data management in Germany. Göttingen. https://d-nb.info/1121685978/34. Accessed 21 September 2022.

  • Reichmann, Stefan; Thomas Klebel; Ilire Hasani‐Mavriqi; and Tony Ross‐Hellauer (2021). Between administration and research: Understanding data management practices in an institutional context. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 72, no. 11, pp. 1415-1431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riche, Nathalie Henry; Christophe Hurter; Nicholas Diakopoulos; and Sheelagh Carpendale (2018). Data-driven storytelling. CRC Press.

  • Rolland, Betsy; and Charlotte P. Lee (2013). Beyond trust and reliability: reusing data in collaborative cancer epidemiology research. In A. Bruckman, S. Counts, C. Lampe and L. Terveen (eds): CSCW’13: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, San Antonio, Texas, 23– 27 February 2013. New York: ACM Press, pp. 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441826

  • Rowhani-Farid, Anisa; Michelle Allen; and Adrian G. Barnett (2017). What incentives increase data sharing in health and medical research? A systematic review. Research Integrity and Peer Review, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-017-0028-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryen, Anne (2011). Ethics and qualitative research. In D. Silverman (ed): Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. London, UK; Thousand Oaks, CA, USA; New Delhi; Singapore: SAGE Publications, pp. 416–238.

  • Showkat, Dilruba; and Eric PS Baumer (2021). Where do stories come from? examining the exploration process in investigative data journalism. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, no. CSCW2, pp. 1-31

  • Sköld, Olle, Lisa Börjesson, and Isto Huvila. (2022). Interrogating paradata. https://doi.org/10.47989/colis2206

  • Steinhardt, Stephanie B.; and Steven J. Jackson (2015). Anticipation Work: Cultivating Vision in Collective Practice. In: CSCW’15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 14–18 March. New York: ACM Press, pp. 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675298

  • Strauss, Anselm L.; and Juliet M. Corbin (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

  • Tenopir Carol; Suzie Allard; Kimberly Douglass; Arsev Umur Aydinoglu; Lei Wu; Eleanor Read; Maribeth Manoff; and Mike Frame (2011) Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and Perceptions. PLOS ONE, vol. 6, no. 6, e21101. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021101

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, David R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomer, Andrea K.; Dharma Akmon; Jeremy J. York; Allison RB Tyler; Faye Polasek; Sara Lafia; Libby Hemphill; and Elizabeth Yakel (2022). The Craft and Coordination of Data Curation: Complicating Workflow Views of Data Science. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, no. CSCW2, pp. 1-29.

  • Treloar, Andrew; and Cathrine Harboe-Ree (2008). Data management and the curation continuum: how the Monash experience is informing repository relationships. In: VALA 2008: The 14th Biennial Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, 5 – 7 February 2008.

  • Tsai, Alexander C.; Brandon A. Kohrt; Lynn T. Matthews; Theresa S. Betancourt; Jooyoung K. Lee; Andrew V. Papachristos; Sheri D. Weiser; and Shari L. Dworkin (2016). Promises and pitfalls of data sharing in qualitative research. Social Science & Medicine, vol. 169, no. November 2016, pp. 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.08.004

  • Tuna, Esen; Katie Chapman; and Inna Kouper (2022). Data Management Workflows in Interdisciplinary Highly Collaborative Research. Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing, pp. 1–3.

  • Twidale, Michael; David Randall; and Richard Bentley (1994). Situated evaluation for cooperative systems. In: CSCW’94: Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA, 22–26 October 1994. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press, pp. 441–452.

  • Velden, Theresa (2013). Explaining field differences in openness and sharing in scientific communities. In A. Bruckman; S. Counts; C. Lampe; and L. Terveen (eds): CSCW’13: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, San Antonio, Texas, 23–27 February. New York, USA: ACM Press, pp. 445–458.

  • Van Den Haak, Maaike; Menno De Jong; and Peter Jan Schellens (2003). Retrospective vs. concurrent think-aloud protocols: testing the usability of an online library catalogue. Behaviour & Information Technology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 339–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/0044929031000

  • Van Der Bles, Anne Marthe; Sander Van Der Linden; Alexandra LJ Freeman; James Mitchell; Ana B. Galvao; Lisa Zaval; and David J. Spiegelhalter (2019). Communicating uncertainty about facts, numbers and science. Royal Society open science 6, no. 5, 181870

  • Wallis, Jillian C.; Elizabeth Rolando; and Christine L. Borgman (2013). If we share data, will anyone use them? Data sharing and reuse in the long tail of science and technology. PloS ONE, vol. 8, no. 7, e67332. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067332

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • West, Christina H.; Kendra L. Rieger; Amanda Kenny; Rishma Chooniedass; Kim M. Mitchell; Andrea Winther Klippenstein; Amie-Rae Zaborniak; Lisa Demczuk; and Shannon D. Scott (2022). Digital Storytelling as a Method in Health Research: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 21, pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221111118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, Angus; and Jonathan Tedds (2011). Making the Case for Research Data Management. DCC Briefing Papers, Edinburgh: Digital Curation Centre (DCC). https://www.dcc.ac.uk/guidance/briefing-papers/making-case-rdm. Accessed 15 July 2022.

  • Wilkinson, Mark D.; Michel Dumontier; IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg; Gabrielle Appleton; Myles Axton; ArieBaak; Niklas Blomberg; Jan-Willem Boiten; Luiz Bonino da Silva Santos; Philip E. Bourne; Jildau Bouwman; Anthony J. Brookes; Tim Clark; Mercè Crosas; Ingrid Dillo; Olivier Dumon; Scott Edmunds; Chris T. Evelo; Richard Finkers; Alejandra Gonzalez-Beltran; Alasdair J.G. Gray; Paul Groth; Carole Goble; Jeffrey S. Grethe; Jaap Heringa; Peter A.C ’t Hoen; Rob Hooft; Tobias Kuhn; Ruben Kok; Joost Kok; Scott J. Lusher; Maryann E. Martone; Albert Mons; Abel L. Packer; Bengt Persson; Philippe Rocca-Serra; Marco Roos; Rene van Schaik; Susanna-Assunta Sansone; Erik Schultes; Thierry Sengstag; Ted Slater; George Strawn; Morris A. Swertz; Mark Thompson; Johan van der Lei; Erik van Mulligen; Jan Velterop; Andra Waagmeester; Peter Wittenburg; Katherine Wolstencroft; Jun Zhao; and Barend Mons (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, vol. 3, no. 1, 1–9https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18

  • Witt, Michael; Jacob Carlson; D. Scott Brandt; and Melissa H. Cragin (2009). Constructing Data Curation Profiles. International Journal of Digital Curation, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 93–103. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v4i3.117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, Volker; Claudia Müller; Volkmar Pipek; David Randall; Markus Rohde; and Gunnar Stevens (2015). Practice-Based Computing: Empirically Grounded Conceptualizations Derived from Design Case Studies. In V. Wulf; K. Schmidt; and D. Randall (eds): Designing Socially Embedded Technologies in the Real-World. London, UK: Springer London, pp. 111–150.

  • Wu, Jing; and Der-Thanq Victor Chen (2020). A systematic review of educational digital storytelling. Computers and Education, vol. 147, April 2020, 103786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, Angus (2014). A pathway to sustainable research data services from scoping to sustainability." Delivering research data management services: fundamentals of good practice, pp. 59–88

  • Xu, Xian; Leni Yang; David Yip; Mingming Fan; Zheng Wei; and Huamin Qu. (2022). From “Wow” to “Why”: Guidelines for Creating the Opening of a Data Video with Cinematic Styles. In S. Barbosa; C. Lampe; C. Appert; D. A. Shamma, S. Drucker; J. Williamson; K. Yatani (eds): CHI’22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New Orleans, LA, USA, 29 April – 5 May 2022. New York, USA: ACM Press, pp. 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501896

  • Zimmerman, Ann (2007). Not by metadata alone: the use of diverse forms of knowledge to locate data for reuse. International Journal on Digital Libraries, vol. 7, nos. 1–2, pp. 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-007-0015-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuiderwijk, Anneke; and Helen Spiers (2019). Sharing and re-using open data: A case study of motivations in astrophysics, International Journal of Information Management. International Journal of Information Management, vol. 49, December 2019, pp. 228–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research has been possible thanks to the engagement of many scholars who have contributed to shaping this work by showing interests in our approach, and sharing their thoughts through interviews, formal or informal meetings and/or seminars’ interactions. The findings in this paper originate from the project INF funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) – (Project ID- 262513311—SFB 1187). The responsibility for all content supplied lies with the authors.

Funding

This research has been funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation). Grant ID—262513311—SFB 1187.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Siegen, Kohlbettstraße 15, 57072, Siegen, Germany

    Gaia Mosconi, Hussain Abid Syed, Dave Randall & Volkmar Pipek

  2. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Aparecido Fabiano Pinatti de Carvalho

  3. Oulu, Finland

    Helena Karasti

Authors
  1. Gaia Mosconi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aparecido Fabiano Pinatti de Carvalho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hussain Abid Syed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dave Randall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Helena Karasti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Volkmar Pipek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Gaia Mosconi as the lead author conducted all the evaluation activities mentioned in the paper and conceptualized the design of the Data Story. Gaia Mosconi and Aparecido Fabiano Pinatti de Carvalho contributed substantially to all sections of the manuscript. Hussain Abid Syed contributed to the introduction and to the discussion. Gaia Mosconi, Dave Randall, and Helena Karasti engaged in several iterations of data analysis. All authors reviewed the manuscript several times and participated with critical comments and suggestions which greatly improved the paper throughout the process.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gaia Mosconi.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

A written informed consent has been used and provided to all participants who have been made aware of the purpose of the study, data analysis procedure, data protection agreements and long-term preservation of the data collection. All participants agreed to take part in the study and consented to the publication of the analysed and anonymized data hereby presented.

Competing interests

The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mosconi, G., de Carvalho, A.F.P., Syed, H.A. et al. Fostering Research Data Management in Collaborative Research Contexts: Lessons learnt from an ‘Embedded’ Evaluation of ‘Data Story’. Comput Supported Coop Work 32, 911–949 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-023-09467-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-023-09467-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation