The purpose of this study is to examine how different ethical dimensions of egoism, utilitarianism, and deontology all help in the formation of psychologists’ research ethics for data sharing, and how the research ethics eventually affect psychologists making decisions regarding whether to engage in data sharing. This research utilized consequentialism theory of ethics as its theoretical framework to develop its research model of psychologists’ data sharing as mediated by research ethics. It conducted an online survey with psychologists in US academic institutions and collected a total of 362 valid responses. Then, it employed the structural equation modeling technique to evaluate the research model and related hypotheses of psychologists’ data sharing intentions as mediated by the profession’s research ethics. This research found that perceived career benefit, perceived community benefit, and norm of data sharing all significantly contribute to the formation of psychologists’ research ethics for data sharing, and then these research ethics, along with perceived community benefit and norm of data sharing, significantly influence psychologists’ data sharing intentions. This study suggests that the consequentialism theory of ethics nicely explains psychologists’ formation of their research ethics for data sharing and their decision to engage in data sharing. The study also suggests that research communities can better promote researchers’ data sharing behaviors by stimulating their research ethics through different ethical dimensions, including egoism (career benefit), utilitarianism (community benefit), and deontology (norm of data sharing).
AjzenI (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process52(2): 179–211.
2.
AjzenIFishbeinM (2005) The influence of attitudes on behavior. In: AlbarracinDJohnsonBTZannaMP (eds) Handbook of Attitudes and Attitude Change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 173–221.
3.
American Psychological Association (2017) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Available at: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
4.
BarnettTVaicysC (2000) The moderating effect of individuals’ perceptions of ethical work climate on ethical judgments and behavioral intentions. Journal of Business Ethics27(4): 351–362.
5.
BassKBarnettTBrownG (1999) Individual difference variables, ethical judgments, and ethical behavioral intentions. Business Ethics Quarterly9(2): 183–205.
6.
BebeauMJMonsonV (2011) Authorship and publication practices in the social sciences: Historical reflections on current practices. Science and Engineering Ethics17(2): 365–388.
7.
BlumenthalDCampbellEGGokhaleM, et al. (2006) Data withholding in genetics and the other life sciences: Prevalences and predictors. Academic Medicine81(2): 137–145.
8.
BockGWZmudRWKimYG, et al. (2005) Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. Mis Quarterly29(1): 87–111.
9.
BorgmanCL (2007) Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge: MIT Press.
10.
BorgmanCL (2010) Research Data: Who will share what, with whom, when, and why? In: Fifth China—North America Library Conference, Beijing, China, 8–12September, pp. 1–21. New York: Elsevier.
11.
BorgmanCL (2012) The Conundrum of Sharing Research Data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology63(6): 1059–1078.
12.
CampbellEGBendavidE (2003) Data-sharing and data-withholding in genetics and the life sciences: Results of a national survey of technology transfer officers. J Health Care Law Policy6(2): 241–255.
13.
CampbellEGClarridgeBRGokhaleNN, et al. (2002) Data withholding in academic genetics—Evidence from a national survey. Journal of the American Medical Association287(4): 473–480.
14.
ChinWW (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research295(2): 295–336.
15.
ChiuC-MHsuM-HWangET (2006) Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems42(3): 1872–1888.
16.
DrachenTEllegaardOLarsenA, et al. (2016) Sharing data increases citations. Liber Quarterly26: 67–82.
17.
DukeCSPorterJH (2013) The ethics of data sharing and reuse in biology. Bioscience63(6): 483–489.
18.
EglenSJMarwickBHalchenkoYO, et al. (2017) Toward standard practices for sharing computer code and programs in neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience20(6): 770–773.
19.
FanielIMZimmermanAS (2011) Beyond the Data Deluge: A Research Agenda for Large-Scale Data Sharing and Reuse. International Journal of Digital Curation6(1): 58–69.
20.
FerrellOCFraedrichJ (2015) Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making & Cases. Toronto, ON, Canada: Nelson Education.
FisherJBFortmannL (2010) Governing the data commons: Policy, practice, and the advancement of science. Information & Management47(4): 237–245.
23.
FornellCBooksteinFL (1982) Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research19(4): 440–452.
24.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research18(3): 382–388.
25.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJ, et al. (2006) Multivariate Data Analysis (6Th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.
HernandezBMontanerTSeseFJ, et al. (2011) The role of social motivations in e-learning: How do they affect usage and success of ICT interactive tools?Computers in Human Behavior27(6): 2224–2232.
27.
HoutkoopBLChambersCMacleodM, et al. (2018) Data sharing in psychology: A survey on barriers and preconditions. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science1(1): 70–85.
28.
JeonSHKimYGKohJ (2011) Individual, social, and organizational contexts for active knowledge sharing in communities of practice. Expert Systems with Applications38(10): 12423–12431.
29.
KankanhalliATanBCYWeiKK (2005) Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. Mis Quarterly29(1): 113–143.
30.
KimY (2017) Fostering scientists’ data sharing behaviors via data repositories, journal supplements, and personal communication methods. Information Processing & Management53(4): 871–885.
31.
KimYNahS (2018) Internet researchers’ data sharing behaviors: An integration of data reuse experience, attitudinal beliefs, social norms, and resource factors. Online Information Review42(1): 124–142.
32.
KimYStantonJM (2012) Institutional and individual influences on scientists’ data sharing practices. Journal of Computational Science Education3(1): 47–56.
33.
KimYStantonJM (2016) Institutional and individual factors affecting scientists’ data-sharing behaviors: A multilevel analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology67(4): 776–799.
34.
KingG (2011) Ensuring the Data-Rich Future of the Social Sciences. Science331(6018): 719–721.
35.
KlingRSpectorL (2003) Rewards for scholarly communication. In: AndersenDL (ed.) Digital Scholarship in the Tenure, Promotion, and Review Process. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc, pp. 78–104.
36.
KostovaTRothK (2002) Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal45(1): 215–233.
37.
KuoFYYoungML (2008) A study of the intention—Action gap in knowledge sharing practices. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology59(8): 1224–1237.
38.
LangatPPisartchikDSilvaD, et al. (2011) Is there a duty to share? Ethics of sharing research data in the context of public health emergencies. Public Health Ethics4(1): 4–11.
39.
LeeHReidEKimWG (2014) Understanding knowledge sharing in online travel communities: Antecedents and the moderating effects of interaction modes. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research38(2): 222–242.
40.
LinFRHuangHY (2013) Why people share knowledge in virtual communities? The use of Yahoo! Kimo Knowledge+ as an example. Internet Research23(2): 133–159.
41.
LiouDKChihWHYuanCY, et al. (2016) The study of the antecedents of knowledge sharing behavior: The empirical study of Yambol online test community. Internet Research26(4): 845–868.
42.
LouisKSJonesLMCampbellEG (2002) Sharing in science. American Scientist90(4): 304–307.
43.
McCulloughBDMcGearyKAHarrisonTD (2008) Do economics journal archives promote replicable research?Canadian Journal of Economics41(4): 1406–1420.
44.
MacMillanD (2014) Data sharing and discovery: What librarians need to know. The Journal of Academic Librarianship40(5): 541–549.
45.
MartoneMEGarcia-CastroAVandenBosGR (2018) Data sharing in psychology. American Psychologist73(2): 111.
46.
NunnallyJCBernsteinIH (1994) Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed.New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
47.
PientaAMAlterGCLyleJA (2010) The enduring value of social science research: The use and reuse of primary research data. In: The organization, economics and policy of scientific research, Torino, 23–24April.
48.
PiwowarHA (2011) Who shares? Who doesn’t? Factors associated with openly archiving raw research data. PLoS ONE6(7): e18657.
49.
PiwowarHAChapmanWW (2008) A review of journal policies for sharing research data. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on electronic publishing, Toronto, ON, Canada, 25–7 June 2008.
50.
PoseyCLowryPBRobertsTL, et al. (2010) Proposing the online community self-disclosure model: The case of working professionals in France and the UK who use online communities. European Journal of Information Systems19(2): 181–195.
51.
ReidenbachRERobinDP (1988) Some initial steps toward improving the measurement of ethical evaluations of marketing activities. Journal of Business Ethics7(11): 871–879.
52.
ReidenbachRERobinDP (1990) Toward the development of a multidimensional scale for improving evaluations of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics9(8): 639–653.
53.
ReidpathDDAlloteyPA (2001) Data sharing in medical research: An empirical investigation. Bioethics15(2): 125–134.
SavageCJVickersAJ (2009) Empirical study of data sharing by authors publishing in PLoS journals. PLoS ONE4(9): e7078.
56.
ScottWR (2007) Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
57.
StanleyBStanleyM (1988) Data sharing. The primary researcher’s perspective. Law and Human Behavior12(2): 173–180.
58.
TenopirCAllardSDouglassK, et al. (2011) Data sharing by scientists: Practices and perceptions. Plos One6(6): e21101.
59.
TenopirCDaltonEDAllardS, et al. (2015) Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide. Plos One10(8): e0134826.
60.
TohidiniaZMosakhaniM (2010) Knowledge sharing behaviour and its predictors. Industrial Management & Data Systems110(3-4): 611–631.
61.
TrumboCWO’KeefeGJ (2005) Intention to conserve water: Environmental values, reasoned action, and information effects across time. Society and Natural Resources18(6): 573–585.
62.
VickersAJ (2006) Whose data set is it anyway? Sharing raw data from randomized trials. Trials7: 15.
63.
VictorBCullenJB (1988) The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly33: 101–125.
64.
VogeliCYucelRBendavidE, et al. (2006) Data withholding and the next generation of scientists: Results of a national survey. Academic Medicine81(2): 128–136.
65.
WaskoMMFarajS (2000) "It is what one does": Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems9(2-3): 155–173.
66.
WichertsJMBorsboomDKatsJ, et al. (2006) The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. American Psychologist61(7): 726–728.
67.
WimbushJCShepardJM (1994) Toward an understanding of ethical climate: Its relationship to ethical behavior and supervisory influence. Journal of Business Ethics13(8): 637–647.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
