Research Data Sharing in Spain: Exploring Determinants, Practices, and Perceptions

Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael and Vidal-Infer, Antonio and Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo and Peset, Fernanda and Ferrer-Sapena, Antonia Research Data Sharing in Spain: Exploring Determinants, Practices, and Perceptions. Data, 0002, vol. 5, n. 29, pp. 1-14. [Journal article (Paginated)]

data-05-00029 (2).pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (2MB) | Preview

English abstract

This work provides an overview of a Spanish survey on research data, which was carried out within the framework of the project Datasea at the beginning of 2015. It is covered by the objectives of sustainable development (goal 9) to support the research. The purpose of the study was to identify the habits and current experiences of Spanish researchers in the health sciences in relation to the management and sharing of raw research data. Method: An electronic questionnaire composed of 40 questions divided into three blocks was designed. The three Section s contained questions on the following aspects: (A) personal information; (B) creation and reuse of data; and (C) preservation of data. The questionnaire was sent by email to a list of universities in Spain to be distributed among their researchers and professors. A total of 1063 researchers completed the questionnaire. More than half of the respondents (54.9%) lacked a data management plan; nearly a quarter had storage systems for the research group; 81.5% used personal computers to store data; “Contact with colleagues” was the most frequent means used to locate and access other researchers’ data; and nearly 60% of researchers stated their data were available to the research group and collaborating colleagues. The main fears about sharing were legal questions (47.9%), misuse or interpretation of data (42.7%), and loss of authorship (28.7%). The results allow us to understand the state of data sharing among Spanish researchers and can serve as a basis to identify the needs of researchers to share data, optimize existing infrastructure, and promote data sharing among those who do not practice it yet.

Spanish abstract

Esta obra ofrece una visión general de una encuesta española sobre datos de investigación, que se llevó a cabo en el marco del proyecto Datasea a principios de 2015. Está cubierta por los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible (meta 9) para apoyar la investigación. El propósito del estudio fue identificar los hábitos y experiencias actuales de los investigadores españoles en las ciencias de la salud en relación con la gestión y el intercambio de datos brutos de investigación. Método: Se diseñó un cuestionario electrónico compuesto de 40 preguntas divididas en tres bloques. Los tres bloques contenían preguntas sobre los siguientes aspectos: A) información personal; B) creación y reutilización de datos; y C) conservación de datos. El cuestionario se envió por correo electrónico a una lista de universidades de España para ser distribuido entre sus investigadores y profesores. Un total de 1063 investigadores completaron el cuestionario. Más de la mitad de los encuestados (54,9%) carecían de un plan de gestión de datos; casi una cuarta parte disponía de sistemas de almacenamiento para el grupo de investigación; el 81,5% utilizaba ordenadores personales para almacenar datos; el "contacto con los colegas" fue el medio más frecuente utilizado para localizar y acceder a los datos de otros investigadores; y casi el 60% de los investigadores declararon que sus datos estaban a disposición del grupo de investigación y de los colegas colaboradores. Los principales temores sobre el intercambio fueron las cuestiones jurídicas (47,9%), el uso indebido o la interpretación de los datos (42,7%) y la pérdida de la autoría (28,7%). Los resultados permiten comprender el estado de la puesta en común de datos entre los investigadores españoles y pueden servir de base para identificar las necesidades de los investigadores de compartir datos, optimizar la infraestructura existente y promover la puesta en común de datos entre aquellos que aún no la practican.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: data sharing; Spanish survey; willingness; drivers; barriers; sustainable research
Subjects: I. Information treatment for information services > IM. Open data
Depositing user: Antonia Ferrer
Date deposited: 13 Nov 2020 21:44
Last modified: 13 Nov 2020 21:44


Alsheikh-Ali, A.A.; Qureshi, W.; Al-Mallah, M.H.; Ioannidis, J.P.A. Public availability of published research data in highimpact journals. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, 24357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Piwowar, H.A.; Chapman, W.W. Public sharing of research datasets: A pilot study of associations. J. Informetr. 2010, 4, 148–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Smith, R.; Roberts, I. Time for sharing data to become routine: The seven excuses for not doing so are all invalid. F1000Research 2016, 5, 781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Gotzsche, P.C. Strengthening and opening up health research by sharing our raw data. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 2012, 5, 236–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

González, L.M.; Saorín, T.; Ferrer, A.; Aleixandre-Benavent, R.; Peset, F. Gestión de datos de investigación: Infraestructuras para su difusión. Prof. Inf. 2013, 22, 414–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Guttmacher, A.E.; Nabel, E.G.; Collins, F.S. Why data-sharing policies matter. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 16894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Gurin, J.; Manley, L.; Ariss, A. Sustainable Development Goals and Open Data. World Bank. 2015. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

Sayogo, D.S.; Pardo, T.A. Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: Understanding the motivation to publish research data. Gov. Inf. Q. 2013, 30, S19–S31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Murray-Rust, P. Open Data in Science. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

Molloy, J.C. The open knowledge foundation: Open data means better science. PLoS Biol. 2011, 9, 1001195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Pisani, E.; AbouZahr, C. Sharing health data: Good intentions are not enough. Bull. WHO 2010, 88, 462–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Krumholz, H.M. Open science and data sharing in clinical research: Basing informed decisions on the totality of the evidence. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 2012, 5, 141–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Rodriguez, V. Access to data and material for research: Putting empirical evidence into perspective. New Genet. Soc. 2009, 28, 67–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Tenopir, C.; Allard, S.; Douglass, K.; Aydinoglu, A.U.; Wu, L.; Read, E.; Manoff, M.; Frame, M. Data sharing by scientists: Practices and perceptions. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, 21101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Chalmers, D.R.; Nicol, D.; Otlowski, M.F. To share or not to share is the question. Appl. Transl. Genom. 2014, 3, 116–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Gharesifard, M.; When, U. To share or not to share: Drivers and barriers for sharing data via online amateur weather networks. J. Hydrol. 2016, 535, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Satinsky, E.; Driessens, C.; Crepaz-Keay, D.; Kousoulis, A.A. Mental health service users’ perceptions of data sharing and data protection: A short qualitative report. J. Innov. Health Inform. 2018, 25, 239–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Data Asset Framework Implementation Guide. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

Ekmekcioglu, C.; Rice, R. Edinburgh Data Audit Implementation Project Final Report 2009. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

McGowan, T.; Gibbs, T.A. Southampton Data Survey: Our Experiences & Lessons Learned 2009. University of Southampton: UK. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

PARSE. Insight 2010. Insight into digital preservation of research output in Europe. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

Simukovic, E.; Kindling, M.; Schirmbacher, P. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Research Data Management Survey Results. ZENODO-Repository. 2013. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

Australian National University. Managing Digital Research Data at the Australian National University. 2016. Available online: (accessed on 6 February 2019).

Van Den Eynden, V.; Knight, G.; Vlad, A.; Radler, B.; Tenopir, C.; Leon, D.; Manista, F.; Whitworth, J.; Corti, L. Survey of Wellcome Researchers and their Attitudes to Open Research. Wellcome Trust. 2016. Available online: (accessed on 5 February 2019).

Aitken, M.; de St Jorre, J.; Pagliari, C.; Jepson, R.; Cunningham-Burley, S. Public responses to the sharing and linkage of health data for research purposes: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. BMC Med. Ethics 2016, 17, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Campbell, E.G.; Clarridge, B.R.; Gokhale, M.; Birenbaum, L.; Hilgartner, S.; A Holtzman, N.; Blumenthal, D. Data withholding in academic genetics—Evidence from a national survey. JAMA 2002, 287, 473–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Levin, N.; Leonelli, S.; Weckowska, D.; Castle, D.; Dupré, J. How Do Scientists Define Openness? Exploring the Relationship between Open Science Policies and Research Practice. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2016, 36, 128–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Pampel, H.; Dallmeier-Tiessen, S. Open Research Data: From Vision to Practice. Available online: (accessed on 4 March 2019).

Van Panhuis, W.; Paul, P.; Emerson, C.; Grefenstette, J.J.; Wilder, R.; Herbst, K.; Heymann, D.L.; Burke, D.S. A systematic review of barriers to data sharing in public health. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Koslow, S.H. Sharing primary data: A threat or asset to discovery? Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2002, 3, 311–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Park, Y.; Greene, C.S. A parasite’s perspective on data sharing. Gigascience 2018, 7, 129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

McGuire, A.L.; Basford, M.; Dressler, L.G.; Fullerton, S.M.; Koenig, B.A.; Li, R.; Mccarty, C.A.; Ramos, E.; Smith, M.E.; Somkin, C.P.; et al. Ethical and practical challenges of sharing data from genome-wide association studies: The eMERGE Consortium experience. Genome Res. 2011, 21, 1001–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Joly, Y.; Dove, E.S.; Knoppers, B.M.; Bobrow, M.; Chalmers, D. Data sharing in the post-genomic world: The experience of the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) Data Access Compliance Office (DACO). PLoS Comput. Biol. 2012, 8, e1002549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Bauer, B.; Ferus, A.; Gorraiz, J.; Gründhammer, V.; Gumpenberger, C.; Maly, N.; Mühlegger, J.M.; Preza, J.L.; Sánchez Solís, B.; Schmidt, N.; et al. Researchers and Their Data. Results Of An Austrian Survey—Report 2015. Zenodo. 2015. Available online: (accessed on 15 December 2019).

Peters, I.; Kraker, P.; Lex, E.; Gunpenberger, C.; Gorraiz, G. Research data explored: An extended analysis of citations and altmetrics. Scientometrics 2016, 107, 723–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Leonelli, S.; Spichtinger, D.; Prainsack, B. Sticks and carrots: Incentives for a meaningful implementation of open science guidelines. Geo 2015, 2, 12–16. [Google Scholar]

Kaye, J.; Heeney, C.; Hawkins, N.; Boddington, P. Data sharing in genomics–re-shaping scientific practice. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2009, 10, 331–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The Collection, Linking and Use of Data in Biomedical Research and Health Care: Ethical Issues. 2015. Available online: (accessed on 7 February 2019).

The BRIF Workshop Group; Andrieu, S.; Bertier, G.; Boeckhout, M.; Cambon-Thomsen, A.; Carpenter, J.; Dagher, G.; Dalgleish, R.; Deschênes, M.; Di Donato, J.H.; et al. The role of a Bioresource Research Impact Factor as an incentive to share human bioresources. Nat. Genet. 2011, 43, 503–504. [Google Scholar]


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item