Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Data in Brief: Can a mega-journal for data be useful?

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As part of the current move towards open science, there is increasing pressure for scientists to share their research data. In support of this, several journals only publish descriptions of data generated from research: data papers. It is not clear whether this service encourages data reuse, however. This article assesses the prevalence and impact of the largest such journal, Data in Brief, comparing it with 24 other general or specialist data journals. The results show that Data in Brief became the largest data journal in 2016 and that its papers attracted over five Mendeley readers each, within a year of publication, as well as a non-trivial amount of citations. Its papers have been cited for relevance or facts contained in them in addition to acknowledging the reuse of associated datasets in about 1% of cases. Some papers describe electronic datasets whereas other papers embedded tables or images that formed the shared data. Overall, the journal seems to make a positive contribution to science by enabling access to multiple types of data, even though its papers rarely lead to data reuse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

FigShare http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11793876.

Code availability

http://lexiurl.wlv.ac.uk.

References

  • ACS. (2018). Author guide, version: December 13, 2018. http://pubsapp.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/jceaax/jceaax_authguide.pdf. Accessed 12 December 2019

  • ACS. (2019). About. Retrieved December 12, 2019, from https://pubs.acs.org/page/jceaax/about.html.

  • Borgman, C. L. (2012). The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,63(6), 1059–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaghan, S., Donegan, S., Pepler, S., Thorley, M., Cunningham, N., Kirsch, P., et al. (2012). Making data a first class scientific output: Data citation and publication by NERCs environmental data centres. International Journal of Digital Curation,7(1), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v7i1.218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candela, L., Castelli, D., Manghi, P., & Tani, A. (2015). Data journals: A survey. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,66(9), 1747–1762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dökmeci, M. (2017). Self-compassion as a mediator between parental acceptance-Rejection and emotional reactivity among university students (Master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University).

  • Döring, M., Guralnick, R., Bloom, D., Wieczorek, J., Braak, K., & Desmet, P. (2014). The GBIF integrated publishing toolkit: Facilitating the efficient publishing of biodiversity data on the internet. PLoS ONE,9(8), e102623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fajardo, C., Amil-Ruiz, F., Fuentes-Almagro, C., De Donato, M., Martinez-Rodriguez, G., Escobar-Niño, A., et al. (2019). An “omic” approach to Pyrocystis lunula: New insights related with this bioluminescent dinoflagellate. Journal of Proteomics,209, 103502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, D., Sansone, S. A., Collis, A., Booth, T., Dukes, P., Gregurick, S. K., et al. (2009). ‘Omics data sharing. Science,326(5950), 234–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, N., Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2019). Data citation and reuse practice in biodiversity: Challenges of adopting a standard citation model. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on scientometrics & informetrics (pp. 1220–1225), Rome, Italy.

  • Li, M. (2018). Spectral modeling of solar and atmospheric radiation for solar power integration. Oakland: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mhamdi, A., Sweii, F. B. S., & Bouazizi, A. (2019). Effect of thermal annealing on the electrical properties of inverted organic solar cells based on PCDTBT: PC 70 BM nanocomposites. Journal of Electronic Materials,48(1), 352–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi, E., Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., & Larivière, V. (2015). Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,66(9), 1832–1846. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassiri, N., Lakhouaja, A., & Cavalli-Sforza, V. (2017). Modern standard Arabic readability prediction. In international conference on Arabic language processing (pp. 120–133). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

  • Newman, P., & Corke, P. (2009). Data paper—Peer reviewed publication of high quality data. The International Journal of Robotics Research,28(5), 587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nica, N. (2019). Nuclear data sheets for A = 155. Nuclear Data Sheets,160(1), 1–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeiffenberger, H., & Carlson, D. (2011). “Earth system science data” (ESSD): A peer reviewed journal for publication of data. D-Lib Magazine. https://doi.org/10.1045/january2011-pfeiffenberger.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piwowar, H. A., & Vision, T. J. (2013). Data reuse and the open data citation advantage. PeerJ,1, e175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poldrack, R. A., & Gorgolewski, K. J. (2014). Making big data open: data sharing in neuroimaging. Nature Neuroscience,17(11), 1510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, S., Schallier, W., Schrimpf, S., Smit, E., & Wilkinson, M. (2011). Report on integration of data and publications (Technical Report). Alfred-Wegener-Institute. http://epic.awi.de/31397/1/ODE-ReportOnIntegrationOfDataAndPublications-1_1.pdf.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaklee, P. M. (2014). Data in brief—Making your data count. Data in Brief,1, 5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvello, G. (2018). Theory and practice of data citation. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,69(1), 6–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenopir, C., Allard, S., Douglass, K., Aydinoglu, A. U., Wu, L., Read, E., et al. (2011). Data sharing by scientists: Practices and perceptions. PLoS ONE,6(6), e21101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2017a). Are Mendeley reader counts useful impact indicators in all fields? Scientometrics,113(3), 1721–1731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2017b). Are Mendeley reader counts high enough for research evaluations when articles are published? Aslib Journal of Information Management,69(2), 174–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2018a). Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation counts. Scientometrics,115(3), 1231–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2018b). Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science? Journal of Informetrics,12(2), 430–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2016). Figshare: A universal repository for academic resource sharing? Online Information Review,40(3), 333–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M., & Wilson, P. (2016). Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,67(8), 1962–1972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallis, J. C., Rolando, E., & Borgman, C. L. (2013). If we share data, will anyone use them? Data sharing and reuse in the long tail of science and technology. PLoS ONE,8(7), e67332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H., Carrier, S., Thompson, A., Greenberg, J., & Scherle, R. (2008). The Dryad data repository: A Singapore framework metadata architecture in a DSpace environment. In Dublin core conference (pp. 157–162). https://dcpapers.dublincore.org/pubs/article/view/928.

  • Zahedi, Z., Haustein, S. & Bowman, T. (2014). Exploring data quality and retrieval strategies for Mendeley reader counts. In Presentation at SIGMET metrics 2014 workshop. https://crc.ebsi.umontreal.ca/en/publications/exploring-data-quality-and-retrieval-strategies-for-mendeley-reader-counts/.

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Statistical Cybermetrics Research Group, University of Wolverhampton, Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton, WV1 1LY, UK

    Mike Thelwall

Authors
  1. Mike Thelwall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mike Thelwall.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None. I have no relationship with Elsevier or Data in Brief or any similar or competing journals.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thelwall, M. Data in Brief: Can a mega-journal for data be useful?. Scientometrics 124, 697–709 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03437-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03437-1

Keywords