Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The “Year of Open Science” initiative, spearheaded by the White House in 2023, catalyzed the adoption of national open science policies across U.S. Federal Government agencies, but open science is an international movement. This paper elucidates the evolving landscape of open science policies, particularly focusing on the Data Management and Sharing Plans by agencies like NIH, NSF, and CDC. While quantitative research (and qualitative research to some degree) has received considerable attention in data sharing, this paper highlights the underexplored terrain of mixed methods research. Through detailed analysis and examples, it advocates for tailored guidelines and collaborative efforts to bridge the gap in data sharing practices, emphasizing the unique challenges and opportunities inherent in mixed methods research.

Keywords

mixed methods research open science data management and sharing

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Branney

Reid

Frost

Coan

Mathieson

Woolhouse

(2019). A context-consent meta-framework for designing open (qualitative) data studies. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(3), 483–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2019.1605477

Brennan

P. F.

Schor

N. F.

Gregurick

S. K.

Lauer

Jorgenson

(2023). Advancing the promise of open science: We want to hear from you. Musins from the Mexxanine. https://nlmdirector.nlm.nih.gov/2023/02/21/advancing-the-promise-of-open-science-we-want-to-hear-from-you/

Center for Open Science . (2023). Anniversary timeline: 10 years of promoting openeness, integrity, and reproducibility of research. Center for Open Science. Retrieved April 17 from. https://www.cos.io/timeline

Chauvette

Schick-Makaroff

Molzahn

A. E.

(2019). Open data in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1609406918823863. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918823863

Chen

(2014). CAS issues open access policy. Chinese Academy of Sciences. https://english.cas.cn/newsroom/archive/news_archive/nu2014/201502/t20150217_140703.shtml

Coyle

C. E.

Schulman-Green

Feder

Toraman

Prust

M. L.

Plano Clark

V. L.

Curry

(2018). Federal funding for mixed methods research in the health sciences in the United States: Recent trends. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 12(3), 305–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816662578

Creswell

J. W.

Klassen

A. C.

Plano Clark

V. L.

Clegg Smith

Meisser

H. F.

(2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. OBSSR. https://obssr.od.nih.gov/mixed_methods_research/

Creswell

J. W.

Plano Clark

V. L.

(2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

Denscombe

(2008). Communities of practice: A research paradigm for the mixed methods approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(3), 270–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808316807

10.

European Research Council . (2022). Open research data and data management plans: Information for ERC grantees [version 4.1]. European Commission. Retrieved from. https://erc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/document/file/ERC_info_document-Open_Research_Data_and_Data_Management_Plans.pdf

11.

Foster

E. D.

Deardorff

(2017). Open science framework (OSF). Journal of the Medical Library Association, 105(2), 203–206. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2017.88

12.

Gong

(2022). Open science: The science paradigm of the new era. Cultures of Science, 5(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/20966083221091867

13.

Greene

J. C.

(2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807309969

14.

Guetterman

T. C.

Sakakibara

R. V.

Plano Clark

V. L.

Luborsky

Murray

S. M.

Castro

F. G.

Creswell

J. W.

Deutsch

Gallo

J. J.

(2019). Mixed methods grant applications in the health sciences: An analysis of reviewer comments. PLoS One, 14(11), Article e0225308. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225308

15.

Haven

T. L.

Errington

T. M.

Gleditsch

K. S.

van Grootel

Jacobs

A. M.

Kern

F. G.

Piñeiro

Rosenblatt

Mokkink

L. B.

(2020). Preregistering qualitative research: A Delphi study. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1609406920976417. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920976417

16.

Japan Science and Technology Agency . (2022). JST policy on open access to research publications and research data management (provisional translation). Japan Science and Technology Agency. Retrived from. https://www.jst.go.jp/EN/about/openscience/policy_openscience_en_r4.pdf

17.

Lee

Y.-J.

(2022, Feb. 3). Sharing of qualitative data: Trends, tools, and best practices for research transparency [Webinar]. Welch Medical Library Classes, Johns Hopkins University.

18.

National Cancer for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion . (2020). Data management plan (DMP) guidance for award applicants and recipients. (DMP-508). National Cancer for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Retrieved from. https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/nofo/extramural-guidance-DMP-508.pdf

19.

National Institute of Aging Division of Social and Behavioral Research . Survey and interview data. In Data management and sharing plan. National Institute of Aging Division of Social and Behavioral Research. Retrieved April 17, 2024, from. https://sharing.nih.gov/sites/default/files/flmngr/NIA_BSR_Survey_Interview_Data_DM_Plan_Example_final.pdf

20.

National Institutes of Health Office of Science Policy . (2020). Final NIH policy for data management and sharing (NOT-OD-21-013). National Institutes of Health Office of Science Policy. Retrieved from. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-21-013.html

21.

National Institutes of Health Scientific Data Sharing . Writing a data management & sharing plan. National Institutes of Health Scientific Data Sharing. Retrieved April 17 from. https://sharing.nih.gov/data-management-and-sharing-policy/planning-and-budgeting-for-data-management-and-sharing/writing-a-data-management-and-sharing-plan#after

22.

National Science Foundation . (2023). NSF public access plan 2.0: Ensuring open, immediate and equitable access to national science foundation funded research. (NSF 23-104). National Science Foundation. Retrieved from. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2023/nsf23104/nsf23104.pdf

23.

National Human Genome Research. (n.d.)

Sample DMS Plan-Survey/Interview Data Project. In Writing data management & sharing plan. National Institute of Health Scientic Data Sharing. Retrieved April 17, 2024, from https://sharing.nih.gov/data-management-and-sharing-policy/planning-and-budgeting-for-data-management-and-sharing/writing-a-data-management-and-sharing-plan#after

24.

Preissle

Glover-Kudon

Rohan

E. A.

Boehm

J. E.

DeGroff

(2015). Putting ethics on the mixed methods map. In Hesse-Biber

S. N.

Johnson

R. B.

(Eds.), The oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry (pp. 144–166). Oxford University Press.

25.

Riley

Brooks

Goodman

Cahill

Branney

Treharne

G. J.

Sullivan

(2019). Celebrations amongst challenges: Considering the past, present and future of the qualitative methods in psychology section of the British psychology society. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(3), 464–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2019.1605275

26.

Shannon-Baker

(2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815575861

27.

Shmagun

Shim

Choi

K.-N.

Shin

S. K.

Kim

Oppenheim

(2024). Korea’s national approach to Open Science: Present and possible future. Journal of Information Science, 50(3), 766–785. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221107336

28.

Smith

McGannon

K. R.

(2018). Developing rigor in qualitative research: Problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2017.1317357

29.

Spellman

B. A.

(2015). A short (personal) future history of revolution 2.0. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 886–899. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615609918

30.

Stadnick

N. A.

Poth

C. N.

Guetterman

T. C.

Gallo

J. J.

(2021). Advancing discussion of ethics in mixed methods health services research. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 577. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06583-1

31.

The White House . (2023). Biden-⁠Harris administration announces new actions to advance open and equitable research. FACT SHEET. Retrieved April 17, 2024, from. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/news-updates/2023/01/11/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-to-advance-open-and-equitable-research/

32.

UNESCO . (2021) UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESDOC Digital Library. https://doi.org/10.54677/MNMH8546

33.

Vicente-Saez

Martinez-Fuentes

(2018). Open science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition. Journal of Business Research, 88, 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.043

34.

Watkins

D. C.

(2023). Secondary data in mixed methods research. Sage Publications.

35.

Witkowski

(2020). Brian A. Nosek: Open science and reproducibility projects. In Witkowski

(Ed.), Shaping psychology: Perspectives on legacy, controversy and the future of the field (pp. 241–266). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50003-0_13

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.

0.00 MB

0.14 MB

From Policy to Practice: Data Sharing Challenges and Opportunities for Mixed Methods Research in the Era of U.S. Open Science Initiatives

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material