台灣社會科學量化資料再用之研究：2001-2015年

The Reuse of Quantitative Data in Social Sciences in Taiwan: 2001-2015

10.6120/JoEMLS.2018.551/0039.RS.AM

林奇秀(Chi-Shiou Lin)；賴璟毅(Ching-Yi Lai)

資料再用 ； 資料引用 ； 量化資料 ； 社會科學 ； Data reuse ； Data citation ； Quantitative data ； Social sciences

教育資料與圖書館學

55卷1期（2018 / 03 / 01）

39 - 69

繁體中文;英文

本文分析2001-2015年間，社會科學領域利用既有量化資料從事具 原創性研究之狀況，取TSSCI 2015年收錄之經濟、政治、社會、教育與心理共五學門57種期刊，辨識出1,484篇再用論文，佔整體實徵論文17.38%，經濟與政治學門比例最高，心理則非常稀少。全部被引資料筆數共2,990筆，亦多由經濟與政治論文使用，且兩大學門論文同時使用多筆資料為常態；社會與教育論文則以使用一筆資料居多。在資料來源與資料類型上，政府機關資料及業務數據為被用大宗，但不同領域在資料來源與類型上有明顯差異；個別研究與一次性資料再用程度都很低。本文建議社會科學的資料庋用服務應著力於蒐集並媒合公私部門的大規模、長期性數據資料，並建立跨政府與民間的服務機制，當可裨益資料的充分再用。

This study explored the reuse of existing quantitative data in original social sciences research in Taiwan. Using the 2015 TSSCI List as the basis of journal selection, this study focused on 57 journals listed under the subject divisions of economics, political science, sociology, education, and psychology. Journal issues published between 2001 and 2015 were manually scanned to identify data reuse papers. The characteristics of the reuse papers and the cited data were recorded for the subsequent subject division-level and subject discipline-level analyses. A total of 1,484 reuse papers were identified, which accounted for 17.38% of the total empirical study papers. Among the five subject divisions, economics and political science had the highest percentages of data reuse, while psychology had the lowest. Those reuse papers together cited 2,990 datasets. Most of the datasets were used in economics and political science papers. Further, these two subject divisions had noticeably larger proportions of papers that use more than one dataset. In contrast, papers using only one dataset were the majority for the rest. In regards to data source and data type, datasets originated from government agencies as well as data generated from business operations accounted for the majority of the cited data, but significant differences existed among those subjects. As opposed to the frequently used business and series survey data, data generated from independent research projects as well as data that were non-continuous and one-time in nature were rarely reused in social sciences research. Based on the study findings, it is recommended that data services for social sciences research should focus more on large-scaled continuous data generated from governments and research institutions. A service mechanism that bridges users and data providers from public and private sectors would also enhance data reuse and increase the value of existing data.

1. Borgman, C. L.(2012).The conundrum of sharing research data.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,63(6),1059-1078.
2. Broom, A.,Cheshire, L.,Emmison, M.(2009).Qualitative researchers' understandings of their practice and the implications for data archiving and sharing.Sciology,43(6),1163-1180.
3. Chao, T. C.(2012).Exploring the rhythms of scientific data use.Proceedings of the 2012 iConference,New York, NY:
4. Data Curation Center. (n.d.). What is data curation? Retrieved from http://www.dcc.ac.uk/digital-curation/what-digital-curation
5. Data Information Specialist Committee - UK. (2010). Questions & answers. Retrieved from http://www.disc-uk.org/qanda.html
6. Fear, K. M.(2013).Ann Arbor, MI,Information and Library Studies, University of Michigan.
7. Henderson, M. E.,Knott, T. L.(2015).Starting a research data management program based in a university library.Medical Reference Services Quarterly,34(1),47-59.
8. Jeng, W.(2017).Pittsburgh, PA,School of Information Sciences, University of Pittsburgh.
9. Kim, J.(2013).Data sharing and its implications for academic libraries.New Library World,114(11/12),494-506.
10. Konkiel, S.(2013).Tracking citation and altmetrics for research data: Challenges and opportunities.Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,39(6),27-32.
11. Kruse, F.,Thestrup, J. B.(2014).Research libraries' new role in research data management, current trends and visions in Denmark.LIBER Quarterly,23(4),310-335.
12. MacMillan, D.(2014).Data sharing and discovery: What librarians need to know.Journal of Academic Librarianship,40(5),541-549.
13. Nasatir, D.(1967).Social science data libraries.The American Sociologist,2(4),207-212.
14. National Research Council(1999).A question of balance: Private right and the public interest in scientific and technical databases.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
15. Piwowar, H. A.(2008).Proposed foundations for evaluation data sharing and reuse in the biomedical literature.Bulletin of IEEE Technical Committee on Digital Libraries,4(2)
16. Piwowar, H. A.,Carlson, J. D.,Vision, T. J.(2011).Beginning to track 1000 datasets from public repositories into the published literature.Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,48(1),1-4.
17. Piwowar, H. A.,Vision, T. J.(2013).Data reuse and the open data citation advantage.PeerJ,1,e175.
18. Robinson-García, N.,Jiménez-Contreras, E.,Torres-Salinas, D.(2016).Analyzing data citation practices using the data citation index.Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,67(12),2964-2975.
19. Sechrest, L.,Sidani, S.(1995).Quantitative and qualitative methods: Is there an alternative?.Evaluation and Program Planning,18(1),77-87.
20. Van den Berg, H.(2005).Reanalyzing qualitative interviews from different angles: The risk of decontextualization and other problems of sharing qualitative data.Forum: Qualitative Social Research,6(1)
21. Xia, J.,Liu, Y.(2013).Usage patterns of open genomic data.College & Research Library,74(2),195-207.
22. Zhang, J.(2011).Philadelphia, PA,Department of Information Science, Drexel University.
23. Zhang, J.,Vogeley, M. S.,Chen, C.(2011).Scientometrics of big science: A case study of research in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.Scientometrics,86(1),1-14.
24. 林奇秀、賴璟毅(2017)。臺灣社會科學學者資料再用行為之研究。圖書資訊學研究，11(2)，95-138。
25. 科技部人文社會科學研究中心（2015）。TSSCI收錄期刊名單。檢自http://www.hss.ntu.edu.tw/model.aspx?no=67【Research Institute for the Humanities and Social Sciences, Ministry of Science and Technology. (2015). TSSCI shoulu qikan mingdan. Retrieved from http://www.hss.ntu.edu.tw/model.aspx?no=67 (in Chinese)】
26. 陳雪華(2012)。導論。e-Research學術圖書館創新服務，台北市=Taipei:

1. 石易儒(Yi-Ru Shih);鄭瑋(Wei Jeng)(2023)。臺灣犯罪學開放研究資料及典藏庫實踐：信任、契約與價值的流動。圖書資訊學刊。21(1)。137-168。