New knowledge from old data: The role of standards in the sharing and reuse of ecological data

Science Technology and Human Values

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 631-652

  Zimmerman, Ann S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Data reuse; Data sharing; Ecology; Objectivity; Standardization

Indexed keywords

EID: 48949085615     PISSN: 01622439     EISSN: 15528251     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0162243907306704     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Alder, K. 2002. The measure of all things: The seven-year odyssey and hidden error that transformed the world. New York: The Free Press.
2. Allchin, D. 1999. Do we see through a social microscope? Credibility as a vicarious selector. Philosophy of Science 66 (Supplement): S287-S298.
3. Beaulieu, A. 2001. Voxels in the brain: Neuroscience, informatics and changing notions of objectivity. Social Studies of Science 31(5): 635-80.
4. Berg, M. 1997. Problems and promises of the protocol. Social Science & Medicine 44 (8): 1081-88.
5. Birnholtz, J., and M. Bietz. 2003. Data at work: Supporting sharing in science and engineering. Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work: 339-43.
6. Bowker, G.C. 2000. Biodiversity datadiversity. Social Studies of Science 30 (5): 643-83.
7. Bowker, G.C., and S.L. Star. 1999. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Bowser, C.J. 1986. Historic data sets: Lessons from the past, lessons for the future. In Research data management in the ecological sciences, ed. W. K. Michener, 155-79. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
9. Brown, C. 2003. The changing face of scientific discourse: Analysis of genomic and proteomic database usage and acceptance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 (10): 926-38.
10. Cambrosio, A., and P. Keating. 1988. "Going monoclonal": Art, science, and magic in the day-to-day use of hybridoma technology. Social Problems 35 (3): 244-60.
11. Campbell, E.G., B.R. Clarridge, M. Gokhale, L. Birenbaum, S. Hilgartner, N.A. Holtzman, and D. Blumenthal. 2002. Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey. JAMA 287 (4): 473-80.
12. Collins, H.M. 1985/1992. Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
13. Collins, H.M., and T. Pinch. 1998. The sex life of the whiptail lizard. In The golem: What you should know about science, 2nd ed., 109-19. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14. Committee on the Future of Long-term Ecological Data. 1995. Final report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the Future of Long-term Ecological Data (FLED) (vols. 1-2). Washington, DC: Ecological Society of America.
15. Edwards, P.N. 2004. "A vast machine": Standards as a social technology. Science 304 (5672): 827-28.
16. Fricker, E. 2002. Trusting others in the sciences: A priori or empirical warrant? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 33 (2): 373-83.
17. Hilgartner, S. 1995. Biomolecular databases: New communication regimes for biology? Science Communication 17 (2): 240-63.
18. Hilgartner, S., and S.I. Brandt-Rauf. 1994. Data access, ownership, and control: Toward empirical studies of access practices. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 15 (4): 355-72.
19. Hine, C. 2006. Databases as scientific instruments and their role in the ordering of scientific work. Social Studies of Science 36 (2): 269-98.
20. Jones, M., C. Berkley, J. Bojilova, and M. Schildhauer. 2001. Managing scientific metadata. IEEE Internet Computing 5 (5): 59-68.
21. King, J.L., and R.L. Frost. 2002. Managing distance over time: The evolution of technologies of dis/ambiguation. In Distributed work, ed. P. Hinds and S. Kiesler, 3-26. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Knorr Cetina, K. 1999. Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Kohler, R.E. 2002. Landscape and labscapes: Exploring the lab-field border in biology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24. Latour, B. 1999. Circulating reference: Sampling the soil in the Amazon forest. In Pandora's hope: Essays on the reality of science studies, 24-79. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
26. Mallard, A. 1998. Compare, standardize and settle agreement: On some usual metrological problems. Social Studies of Science 28 (4): 571-601.
27. Markus, M.L. 2001. Toward a theory of knowledge reuse: Types of knowledge reuse situations and factors in reuse success. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (1): 57-93.
28. McCain, K.W. 1991. Communication, competition, and secrecy: The production and dissemination of research-related information in genetics. Science, Technology, & Human Values 16 (4): 491-516.
29. Michener, W.K. 2000. Transforming data into information and knowledge. In Ecological data: Design, management and processing, ed. W. K. Michener and J. W. Brunt, 142-61. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
30. Michener, W., J. Brunt, J. Helly, T. Kirchner, and S. Stafford. 1997. Nongeospatial metadata for the ecological sciences. Ecological Applications 7(1): 330-42.
31. National Research Council. 1995. Finding the forest in the trees: The challenge of combining diverse environmental data: Selected case studies. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Research Council. 1997. Bits of power: Issues in global access to scientific data. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. National Research Council. 2003. NEON: Addressing the nation's environmental challenges. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34. Oromaner, M. 1977. Professional age and the reception of sociological publications: A test of the Zuckerman-Merton hypothesis. Social Studies of Science 7 (3): 381-88.
35. Porter, T.M. 1995. Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36. Roth, W-M., and G.M. Bowen. 2001a. "Creative solutions " and "fibbing results": Enculturation in field ecology. Social Studies of Science 31 (4): 533-56.
37. Roth W.-M. Bowen G.M. 2001b. Of disciplined minds and disciplined bodies: On becoming an ecologist. Qualitative Sociology 24 (4): 459-81.
38. Senkowsky, S. 2005. Planning of NEON moves ahead. BioScience 55 (2): 106-12.
39. Star, S.L. 1985. Scientific work and uncertainty. Social Studies of Science 15 (3): 391 - 426.
40. Weltzin J.F., R.T. Belote, L.T. Williams, J.K. Keller, and E.C. Engel. 2006. Authorship in ecology: Attribution, accountability, and responsibility. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4 (8): 435-41.
41. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
42. Zimmerman, A. 2007. Not by metadata alone: The use of diverse forms of knowledge to locate data for reuse. International Journal on Digital Libraries 7 (1-2): 5-16.