Linda Naughton presenting on the lessons learnt from the Journal Research Data Policy Registry pilot at a workshop organised by National Institutes of Health and SPARC held at the World Bank on the 7th of October in Washington, DC.

1. Linda Naughton
Journal Research Data Policy Registry (JRDPR)07/10/15

2. Mission
To enable people in higher
education, further education and
skills to perform at the forefront of
international practice by exploiting
fully the possibilities of modern
digital empowerment, content
and connectivity
Our vision and mission
2
Vision
To make the UK the most
digitally advanced
education and research
nation in the world
#connectmore

3. What Jisc does
»Delivers shared digital infrastructure and
services for universities and colleges
»Brokers sector-wide deals with IT
vendors and commercial publishers
»Provides expert and trusted advice
and practical assistance

4. Co-design partners
142 ideas considered
24 defined and pitched
6 challenges prioritised
>100 senior stakeholders
prioritised ideas
> 1000 colleagues consulted

5. Co-design challenges
Research at risk (R@R)
Prospect to alumnus (P2A) Learning analytics
Digital learning & capabilitiesImplementing FELTAG
Business intelligence
Hosting platform Hosting platform

6. Research Data
Management is
business as usual

7. Research Data infrastructure
7
Data
Clouod
Librarians, research managers & IT
have interlocking services, to
support researcher needs and
institutional policies
Researchers have a cohesive suite of
research data management,
publication and discovery services
Research data management
and planning services
Research data storage and archival services
Research data discovery services
UKDA, BADCICSU / WDSEBI / GenBank
Research data management applications
Journal & funder policy
registries Research data registry / Cross
repository discovery service
DMPonline
DMP Registry
SWORD +
Disciplinary data repositories
(National and International)
Institutional data catalogues
Disciplinary research data Discovery
services
Metadata exchange between journals, archives, repositories
Data identifiers, metadata
schema, metrics
Supportfor Research data lifecycle
Storage
Infrastructure
components that
underpin all functions &
services
Researcher identifiers Organisation identifiers RegistriesData Identifiers
Research data management applications
Network / Janet - Security/UK access management federation
Key
Jisc
supported:
Other
supported:
Advice,
guidance & training is
also needed

8. 8
To develop best practice on
journal policies between
publishers and other
stakeholders. To make it easy for
researchers to know how to
follow policies and for journals to
create RD policies
Journal Research
Data Policies
Registry
•Start: April 2015
•End: September 2016
•Website: http://bit.ly/1Ks8jhb
•End Goals: a shared service with
easy access to journal research
data policies and common
related standards
M
No. Objective Deadline
1 To build a community of engaged stakeholders who will
accomplish a number of key tasks for the project as well
as raise the profile of the project with both the UK sector
and the international research community.
First round April-June 2015
Second round September 2016
2 To build consensus on the elements and
understanding of journal research data policies
through a range of activities such as an RDA group,
the Project Expert Advisory Group and practitioner
engagement through testing.
Project Expert Advisory group
June 2015
RDA Group September 2015 –
March 2017
3 To develop and build a prototype Journal Research Data
Policy Registry service which meets the needs of the use
cases developed and prioritised in consultation with the
stakeholder group.
September 2015 (Rapid prototype)
Iterative development to April 2016
then wider user-testing.
4 To evaluate the prototype against the use cases as a
proof of concept exercise.
September 2016
5 To evaluate the potential for a Journal RD Policy
Registry service and the further implementation and
uptake of the best practice developed
September 2016
https://flic.kr/p/rob872 (cc-by) jakerust/gotcredit@flickr

9. Use case development
»Potential users of the service are considered to be:
› Researchers
› Librarians/RDM support staff
› Research Managers
› Funders/policy makers
› Publishers/journal editors/learned societies
› Research data repositories/data centres
15/10/2015 JRDPR Expert Advisory Group - Use Case Development 9

10. Question Set
»Journal, ISSN, publisher, country, and data policy name.
»Is there a policy, data policy type, data deposit
requirements, consequences of non-compliance, how will
data be shared, is there guidance, will the data be peer
reviewed, when should the data be submitted,
exceptions, data access statements (where),
licences/copyright transfer agreements for data?
4/02/15 Jisc: Supporting Cloud and Data Centres 10

11. Research Data Question Set
11
» The lack of standard definitions of terms. For example, what do we mean by the data and
supplementary data? There are NISO guidelines for supplementary data but they have not
been widely adopted by journals.
» The level of granularity required to capture policy at the data set level is too complex for the
data model.
» Different interpretations of data sharing according to discipline. Do we mean all the data or
do we mean specific data types (discipline specific) or the data behind the article. How is that
defined by the policy?
» What does peer-review of data include? Rigour of methodology; validity of the results;
reproducibility of results; or something else? The question ‘is the data peer-reviewed’ cannot
capture these differences.
» Some of the content relates to submission guidelines rather than policy. We would expect a
policy to be more stable than submission guidelines so this creates an issue of keeping the
registry up to date. The lack of version control is also an issue with regards to the webpages
where the information is held.
Issues Log – some examples

12. Research Data Question Set
12
» Many different licensing options are further complicated by hybrid journals.
Introducing data policy type to the question set means that a journal can have a
1:multiple policy relationship but the OA policy element to hybrid journals often
refers more to the article than the data.
» Exceptions for data – sensitive data, commercial data, 3rd party data makes the
lowest common denominator ‘available on request’.
» How does the registry account for different requirements from funders? For
example DataAccess Statements are required by UK funders but this is not
scalable when taking into account all of the possible funder requirements.
» Issue of scale to provide adequate coverage – REF (UK) 12,500 journals.
» The wider research data context has an impact on journal policies i.e. publishers,
funders, repositories, domain-specific practice and institutions. This raises the
question of where to apply the focus towards improving practice?
Issues Log – some examples

13. How many journals have a research data policy
13
52.4
23.2
23.2
All Journals
64.8
14.4
18.4
Science Journals
40
32
28
Social Science
Journals
Full Policy Partial Policy No Policy

14. How many journals are mandating data deposit?
14
30.2
40.6
29.2
All Journals
45.8
30.8
23.4
Science Journals
10.5
53
36.5
Social Science
Journals
Mandated OptionalRecommended

15. Technical Feasibility
15

16. From question set to policy template
» Definition of terms
» Standardisation of terms
» Implementation process e.g. NISO ‘supplementary material’,
CASRAI, RIOXX, ORCID
» Purpose and scope of the policy – funder/publisher/journal/data
centre/institution?
» Data level and domain level?
» Wider context – other tools (DMPOnline, Bio-sharing.org),
systems (Researchfish), initiatives (Pasteur4OA, COPDESS)
16