What question did this study set out to answer?

To determine how field-level differences in the public sharing and reuse of research data reflect specific disciplinary knowledge-generation practices.

August 20, 2026Quantitative Science StudiesOpen Access

The Field-Specificity of Data Practices and the Public Sharing of Research Data (Part 2): How Patterns of Data Sharing and Re-Use Reflect Epistemic Practices of Research

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

TVTheresa VeldenGerman Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies VXValmira Xharavina

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Survey analysis reveals that disciplinary epistemic practices drive data sharing and reuse across university subfields, suggesting open science policies require fine-grained customization.

Key Points

To determine how field-level differences in the public sharing and reuse of research data reflect specific disciplinary knowledge-generation practices.
Analyzed data from a large, multidisciplinary survey of researchers across 19 selected subfields at German universities.
Triangulated empirical field-level sharing and reuse rates with qualitative science studies literature on disciplinary epistemic practices.
Pronounced differences in data sharing and reuse rates were strongly coupled to granular disciplinary practices of knowledge production.
Accessibility of empirical research objects and the perceived analytic potential of generated data were identified as primary epistemic factors governing data sharing and reuse.
Granular epistemic variations across subfields directly impact the effectiveness and design requirements of institutional open science policies.

Cite This Study

Velden et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a86b5ff8a91293e6a1cd9c5 https://doi.org/10.1162/qss.a.507

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

August 20, 2026Quantitative Science StudiesOpen Access

The Field-Specificity of Data Practices and the Public Sharing of Research Data (Part 2): How Patterns of Data Sharing and Re-Use Reflect Epistemic Practices of Research

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

TVTheresa VeldenGerman Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies VXValmira Xharavina

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Survey analysis reveals that disciplinary epistemic practices drive data sharing and reuse across university subfields, suggesting open science policies require fine-grained customization.

Key Points

To determine how field-level differences in the public sharing and reuse of research data reflect specific disciplinary knowledge-generation practices.
Analyzed data from a large, multidisciplinary survey of researchers across 19 selected subfields at German universities.
Triangulated empirical field-level sharing and reuse rates with qualitative science studies literature on disciplinary epistemic practices.
Pronounced differences in data sharing and reuse rates were strongly coupled to granular disciplinary practices of knowledge production.
Accessibility of empirical research objects and the perceived analytic potential of generated data were identified as primary epistemic factors governing data sharing and reuse.
Granular epistemic variations across subfields directly impact the effectiveness and design requirements of institutional open science policies.

Cite This Study

Velden et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a86b5ff8a91293e6a1cd9c5 https://doi.org/10.1162/qss.a.507

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark