Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37085512›Full record

ArticleScientific data2023

Estimating social bias in data sharing behaviours: an open science experiment.

Claudia Acciai, Jesper W Schneider, Mathias W Nielsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Claudia AcciaiDepartment of Sociology, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark. cla@soc.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0001-6779-2653
Jesper W SchneiderDanish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 7, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-5556-0919
Mathias W NielsenDepartment of Sociology, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark. mwn@soc.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0001-8759-7150

Funding

Carlsbergfondet (Carlsberg Foundation) CF19-0566
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Open data sharing is critical for scientific progress. Yet, many authors refrain from sharing scientific data, even when they have promised to do so. Through a preregistered, randomized audit experiment (N = 1,634), we tested possible ethnic, gender and status-related bias in scientists' data-sharing willingness. 814 (54%) authors of papers where data were indicated to be 'available upon request' responded to our data requests, and 226 (14%) either shared or indicated willingness to share all or some data. While our preregistered hypotheses regarding bias in data-sharing willingness were not confirmed, we observed systematically lower response rates for data requests made by putatively Chinese treatments compared to putatively Anglo-Saxon treatments. Further analysis indicated a theoretically plausible heterogeneity in the causal effect of ethnicity on data-sharing. In interaction analyses, we found indications of lower responsiveness and data-sharing willingness towards male but not female data requestors with Chinese names. These disparities, which likely arise from stereotypic beliefs about male Chinese requestors' trustworthiness and deservingness, impede scientific progress by preventing the free circulation of knowledge.

Identifiers

PMID37085512
PMCPMC10120507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.