This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Modern research strongly depends on software that is essential in various domains, including engineering, sciences, and other fields, and most often developed within universities and used by the researchers themselves. This software, specifically referred to as research software, presents a unique set of challenges and constraints in its life cycle, methodology, practices, disclosure, and incentives, thereby distinguishing it from conventional software. However, while certain research software developed and used in universities have achieved widespread use and been adopted by the academic community, thereby considered “successful”, others have failed to secure the same level of adoption, resulting in non-adoption and abandonment software leading to an unnecessary expenditure of development time and resources. Gaining a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing the adoption can assist in mitigating these issues. In this context, the primary aim of this study is to investigate factors influencing the adoption of research software by users and developers, to discern their relative importance, and to explore the challenges associated with fostering the adoption of such software. A survey involving 173 Brazilian academic researchers was executed to gather insights regarding the significance of the factors contributing to the adoption of research software and the obstacles encountered in its adoption. The collected data underwent rigorous statistical analysis, utilizing Independent Sample T-test and Factor Analysis to thoroughly examine the information and provide a ranking of factors. The survey responses were used to rank factors contributing to the adoption of research software, with results stratified by respondents’ profiles. This study suggests that academic researchers can optimize their use of research software by recognizing and prioritizing adoption factors, preventing non-adoption, and overcoming the identified challenges. Understanding the relative importance of each factor can enhance support for research software developers and users and, consequently, promote the broader adoption of research software.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mourão et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: