Abstract zum 51. DGPs Kongress

The PODMAN pro­ject — How to make rese­arch data manage­ment a per­so­nal resource!?

Kata­ri­na Blask1, André Förster1, Mari­na Lemaire1, Gise­la Minn1, Erich Weich­sel­gart­ner², Georg Müller-Fürstenberger1
1 Uni­ver­si­ty of Trier
²ZPID — Leib­niz Insti­tu­te for Psy­cho­lo­gy Infor­ma­ti­on, Trier


Fach­grup­pe: Metho­den und Evaluation

Do we have a repli­ca­ti­on cri­sis? Is bad sci­en­ti­fic con­duct a signi­fi­cant pro­blem? Even though the majo­ri­ty of psy­cho­lo­gi­cal rese­ar­chers would agree, only a mino­ri­ty reco­gni­zes rese­arch data manage­ment (RDM) as a solu­ti­on to the­se issues. Ins­tead, RDM is still per­cei­ved as a wicked pro­blem by many rese­ar­chers and ser­vice pro­vi­ders, resul­ting in a wide varie­ty of avo­id­ance respon­ses. This is of litt­le help in many ways, becau­se rese­ar­chers should per­cei­ve RDM as a resour­ce to opti­mi­ze their rese­arch out­put. Howe­ver, why is avo­id­ance the pre­vai­ling respon­se when it comes to RDM? In our pro­ject, we start from the assump­ti­on that the main reasons for this mis­per­cep­ti­on are uncer­tain­ty and a lack of incen­ti­ves. That is, rese­ar­chers and other actors (e.g., sup­port­ing staff from libra­ri­es and com­pu­ter cen­ters) invol­ved in RDM often do not know how and why they should do RDM. Taking the per­spec­ti­ve of all the­se per­sons con­fron­ted with RDM, we try to con­cep­tua­li­ze an opti­mi­zed RDM pro­cess, whe­r­ein the­se ques­ti­ons have not to be posed any lon­ger and RDM can be reco­gni­zed as the per­so­nal resour­ce it actual­ly is.

gefördert vom

Diese Website verwendet das großartige -Plugin.