RESEARCH ARTICLE
Data reusers' trust development
Ayoung Yoon,
Ayoung Yoon
School of Informatics and Computing, Department of Library and Information Science, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, 535 W. Michigan Street, IT 563, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3103
Search for more papers by this authorAyoung Yoon,
Ayoung Yoon
School of Informatics and Computing, Department of Library and Information Science, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, 535 W. Michigan Street, IT 563, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3103
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Data reuse refers to the secondary use of data—not for its original purpose but for studying new problems. Although reusing data might not yet be the norm in every discipline, the benefits of reusing shared data have been asserted by a number of researchers, and data reuse has been a major concern in many disciplines. Assessing data for trustworthiness becomes important in data reuse with the growth in data creation because of the lack of standards for ensuring data quality and potential harm from using poor-quality data. This research explores many facets of data reusers' trust in data generated by other researchers focusing on the trust judgment process with influential factors that determine reusers' trust. The author took an interpretive qualitative approach by using in-depth semistructured interviews as the primary research method. The study results suggest different stages of trust development associated with the process of data reuse. Data reusers' trust may remain the same throughout their experiences, but it can also be formed, lost, declined, and recovered during their data reuse experiences. These various stages reflect the dynamic nature of trust.
References
- Adelman, J., Baak, M., Boelaert, N., D'Onofrio, M., Frost, J.A., Guyot, C., … Wilson, M.G. (2010). ATLAS offline data quality monitoring. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 219(4), 1–6. doi: http://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/219/4/042018
- Altman, M., & King, G. (2007). A proposed standard for the scholarly citation of quantitative data. D-Lib Magazine, 13(3/4). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march07/altman/03altman.html.
- Anderson, J.C., & Narus, J.A. (1990). A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 42–58.
- Aronson, E., Wilson, T.D., & Akert, R. (2010). Social psychology ( 7th ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.
- Birnholtz, J.P., & Bietz, M. (2003). Data at work: Supporting sharing in science and engineering. In GROUP'03 Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work (pp. 339–348). New York, NY: ACM.
- Borgman, C.L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Callaghan, S. (2015). Data without peer: Examples of data peer review in earth sciences. D-Lib Magazine, 21(1/2). doi: 10.1045/january2015-callaghan
- Carlson, S., & Anderson, B. (2007). What are data? The many kinds of data and their implications for data re-use. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 635–651. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00342.x
- Chopra, K., & Wallace, W. (2003). Trust in electronic environments. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'03) 9(9), pp. 331–341.
- Daniels, M., Faniel, I., Fear, K., & Yakel, E. (2012). Managing fixity and fluidity in data repositories. Proceedings of the 2012 iConference (pp. 279–286). New York, NY.
- Donaldson, D.R., & Conway, P. (2015). User conceptions of trustworthiness for digital archival documents. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(12), 2427–2444. doi:10.1002/asi.23330
- Doney, P.M., & Cannon, J.P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35. doi:10.2307/1251829
- Faniel, I.M., & Jacobsen, T.E. (2010). Reusing scientific data: How earthquake engineering researchers assess the reusability of colleagues' data. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 19(3-4), 355–375. doi:10.1007/s10606-010-9117-8
- Faniel, I.M., Kansa, E., Kansa, S.W., Barrera-Gomez, J., & Yakel, E. (2013). The challenges of digging data: A study of context in archaeological data reuse. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 295–304). New York, NY: JCDL '13. doi:10.1145/2467696.2467712.
- Faniel, I.M., Kriesberg, A., & Yakel, E. (2015). Social scientists' satisfaction with data reuse. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 1–13. doi:10.1002/asi.23480.
- Fear, K. (2013). Measuring and anticipating the impact of data reuse. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/102481
- Giffin, K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust and the communication process. Psychological Bulletin, 68, 104−120.
- Gleit, C., & Graham, B. (1989). Secondary data analysis: A valuable resource. Nursing Research, 38(6), 380–381. doi:10.1097/00006199-198911000-00018
- Good, D. (1988). Individuals, interpersonal relations and trust. In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp. 31–48). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
- Gray, J., Szalay, A.S., Thakar, A.R., Stoughton, C., & vandenBerg, J. (2002). Online scientific data curation, publication, and archiving. In the Proceedings of SPIE, 4846, 103–107. Bellingham, WA: SPIE. doi:10.1117/12.461524
- Guest, G., & Namey, E.E. (2014). Public health research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications.
- Hinds, P.S., Vogel, R.J., & Clarke-Steffen, L. (1997). The possibilities and pitfalls of doing a secondary analysis of a qualitative data set. Qualitative Health Research, 7(3), 408–424. doi:10.1177/104973239700700306
- Hislop, D. (2004). The paradox of communities of practice: Knowledge sharing between communities. In P.M. Hildreth & C. Kimble (Eds.), Knowledge networks: Innovation through communities of practice (pp. 36–45). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
- Jirotka, M., Procter, R., Hartswood, M., Slack, R., Simpson, A., Coopmans, C., & Voss, A. (2005). Collaboration and trust in healthcare innovation: The eDiaMoND case study. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14, 369–398. doi: 10.1007/s10606-005-9001-0
- Karasti, H., & Baker, K.S. (2008). Digital data practices and the long term ecological research program growing global. International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(2), 42–58. doi:10.2218/ijdc.v3i2.57
- Kelton, K., Fleischmann, K.R., & Wallace, W.A. (2008). Trust in digital information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(3), 363–374. doi:10.1002/asi.20722
- Kratz, J.E., & Strasser, C. (2015). Researcher perspectives on publication and peer review of data. PLoS One, 10(2). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117619
- Lewis, J.D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social Forces, 63(4), 967–985.
- Marsh, S., & Dibben, M. (2003). The role of trust in information science and technology. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37(1), 465–498. doi: 10.1002/aris.1440370111
- Mayer, R., Davis, J., & Schoorman, D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335
- McCall, R.B., & Appelbaum, M.I. (1991). Some issues of conducting secondary analyses. Developmental Psychology, 27(6), 911–917. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.27.6.911
- Mooney, H. (2011). Citing data sources in the social sciences: Do authors do it? Learned Publishing, 24(2), 99–108. doi:10.1087/20110204
- Niu, J., & Hedstrom, M. (2008). Documentation evaluation model for social science data. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 45(1), 11–11. Retrieved from hdl.handle.net/2027.42/63090
- Parsons, M.A., Duerr, R., & Minster, J.-B. (2010). Data citation and peer review. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 91(34), 297–298. doi:10.1029/2010EO340001
- Ring, P.S., & Van de Ven, A.H. (1992). Structuring cooperative relationships between organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 13(7), 483–498. doi:10.1002/smj.4250130702
- Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: Across-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404. 10.5465/AMR.1998.926617
- Sales, E., Lichtenwalter, S., & Fevola, A. (2006). Secondary analysis in social work research education: Past, present, and future promise. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(3), 543–560. doi: 10.5175/JSWE.2006.200404136
- Smith, J.A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 39–54. doi: 10.1191/1478088704qp004oa
- Smith, J.A. (2007). Hermeneutics, human sciences and health: Linking theory and practice. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 2(1), 3–11. doi:10.1080/17482620601016120
- Stockhause, M., Höck, H., Toussaint, F., & Lautenschlager, M. (2012). Quality assessment concept of the World Data Center for Climate and its application to CMIP5 data. Geoscientific Model Development, 5, 1023–1032. http://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1023-2012
- Tomlinson, E.C., & Mayer, R.C. (2009). The role of casual attribution dimensions in trust repair. The Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 85–104. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.35713291
- Van House, N.A. (2002). Digital libraries and practices of trust: Networked biodiversity information. Social Epistemology, 16(1), 99–114.
- Van House, N.A., Butler, M.H., & Schiff, L.R. (1998). Cooperative knowledge work and practices of trust: Sharing environmental planning data sets. The ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 335–343). Seattle, WA.
- Wallis, J.C., Borgman, C.L., Mayernik, M.S., Pepe, A., Ramanathan, N., & Hansen, M. (2007). Know thy sensor: Trust, data quality, and data integrity in scientific digital libraries. Proceedings of 11th European Conference, ECDL September 16–21. (pp. 380–391). Budapest, Hungary: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
- Welman, J.C., & Kruger, S.J. (1999). Research methodology for the business and administrative sciences. Johannesburg, South Africa: International Thompson.
- Wenger, E., McDermott, R.A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Watertown, MA: Harvard Business Press.
- Williams, M. (2001). In whom we trust: Group membership as an affective context for trust development. The Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 377–396. doi:10.2307/259183
- Willig, C. (2008). Introducing qualitative research in psychology ( 2nd ed.). Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
- Yakel, E., Faniel, I., Kriesberg, A., & Yoon, A. (2013). Trust in digital repositories. International Journal of Digital Curation, 8(1), 143–156. doi:10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.251
- Yoon, A. (2014). End users' trust in data repositories: Definition and influences on trust development. Archival Science, 14(1), 17–34. doi: 10.1007/s10502-013-9207-8
- Zimmerman, A.S. (2008). New knowledge from old data: The role of standards in the sharing and reuse of ecological data. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33(5), 631–652. doi:10.1177/0162243907306704
- Zucker, L.G. (1986). The production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure. Research in Original Behavior, 8, 55–111.
