Research Data Workflows: From Research Data Lifecycle Models to Institutional Solutions

Tanja Wissik
ACDH-OEAW, Vienna, Austria

Matej Ďurčo
ACDH-OEAW, Vienna, Austria

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: Selected Papers from the CLARIN Annual Conference 2015, October 14–16, 2015, Wroclaw, Poland

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 123:8, s. 94-107

NEALT Proceedings Series 28:8, p. 94-107

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2016-04-11

ISBN: 978-91-7685-765-6

ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)


In this paper we will present an institutional research data workflow model covering the whole lifecycle of the data and showcase the implementation of the model in a specific institutional context. We will present a case study from the Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities, a newly founded research institute for digital humanities of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, which also supports researchers in the humanities as service unit. The main challenge addressed is how to harmonize existing processes and systems in order to reach a clear division of roles and achieve a workable, sustainable workflow in dealing with research data.


Inga nyckelord är tillgängliga


[Allan, 2009] Robert Allan. 2009. Virtual Research Environments. From portals to science gateways. Chandos Publishing, Oxford, UK.

[Akers et al. 2014] Katherine G. Akers, F.C. Sferdean, Natsuko H. Nicholls, Jennifer A. Green. 2014. Building Support for Research Data Management: Biographies of Eight Research Universities. International Journal of Digital Curation. 9(2):171-191.

[Akers and Doty, 2013] Katherine G. Akers and Jennifer Doty. 2013. Disciplinary Differences in Faculty Research Data Management Practices and Perspectives. The International Journal of Digital Curation, 8(2):5-26.

[Barkow et al., 2013] Ingo Barkow, William Block, Jay Greenfield, Arofan Gregory, Marcel Hebing, Larry Hoyle, Wolfgang Zenk-Möltgen. 2013. Generic longitudinal business process model. DDI Working Paper Series – Longitudinal Best Practice, No. 5. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/DDILongitudinal2-01

[Beitz et al., 2014] Antony Beitz, David Groenewegen, Cathrine Harboe-Ree, Wilna Macmillan and Sam Searle. 2014. Monash University, a strategic approach. In: Graham Pryor, Sarah Johnes and Angus Whyte. 2014. Delivering Research Data Management Services. Fundamentals of good practices Facet Publishing, London, UK. 163-189.

[Briney, 2015] Kristin Briney. 2015. Data Management for Researchers. Organize, maintain and share your data for research success. Pelagic Publishing, Exeter, UK.

[Bauer et al., 2015] Bruno Bauer, Andreas Ferus, Juan Gorraiz, Veronika Gründhammer, Christian Gumpenberger, Nikolaus Maly, Johannes Michael Mühlegger, José Luis Preza;, Barbara Sánchez Solís, Nora Schmidt andChristian Steineder (2015): Forschende und ihre Daten. Ergebnisse einer österreichweiten Befragung. Report 2015. Version 1.2. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.32043. Online available at http://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:407513

[Broeder et al. 2010] Daan Broeder, Marc Kemps-Snijders, Dieter Van Uytvanck, Menzo Windhouwer, Philip Withers, Peter Wittenburgand Claus Zinn.2010. A data category registry-and component-based metadata framework. In Seventh conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation [LREC 2010]. European Language Resources Association (ELRA). 43-47.

[Brown and White, 2014] Mark L. Brown and Wendy White. 2014. University of Southampton – a partnership approach to research data management. In: Graham Pryor, Sarah Johnes and Angus Whyte. 2014. Delivering Research Data Management Services. Fundamentals of good practices. Facet Publishing, London, UK. 135-161.

[Budin et al, 2013] Gerhard Budin, Karlheinz Moerth and Matej Durco. 2013. European Lexicography Infrastructure Components. In Iztok Kosem, JelenaKallas, Polona Gantar, Simon Krek, Margit Langemets and Maria Tuulik (eds.), Electronic lexicography in the 21st century: thinking outside the paper. Proceedings of the eLex 2013 conference, 17-19 October 2013 (pp. 76–92). Tallin, Estonia: Trojina, Institute for Applied Slovene Studies/Eesti Keele Instituut. http://eki.ee/elex2013/conf-proceedings/

[Carlson, 2014] Jake Carlson. 2014. The Use of Life Cycle Models in Developing and Supporting Data Services. In: Joyce M Ray (ed). 2014. Research Data Management. Practical Strategies for Information Professionals. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, IN. 63-86.

[CEOS, 2011] CEOS. 2011. CEOS Working Group on Information Systems and Services. Data Life Cycle Models and Concepts. CEOS Version 1.0. Available at http://ceos.org/document_management/Working_Groups/WGISS/Documents/WGISS_DSIG-Data-Lifecycle-Models-and-Concepts-v8_Sep2011.docx

[Choudhury, 2014] G. Sayeed Choudhury. 2014. John Hopkins University Data Management Services. In: Graham Pryor, Sarah Jones and Angus Whyte. 2014. Delivering Research Data Management Services. Fundamentals of good practices. Facet Publishing, London, UK: 115-133.

[Corti et al., 2014] Louise Corti, Veerle Van den Eynden, Libby Bishop and Mattew Woolard. 2014. Managing and sharing research data. A guide to good practice. SAGE, London, UK.

[Durco, 2013] Matej Durco. 2013. SMC4LRT - Semantic Mapping Component for Language Resources and Technology. Technical University, Vienna, Austria. http://permalink.obvsg.at/AC11178534

[Faundeen et al., 2013] John L. Faundeen, Thomas E. Burley, Jennifer A. Carlino, David L. Govoni, Heather S. Henkel, Sally L. Holl, Vivian B. Hutchison, Elizabeth Martín, Ellyn T. Montgomery, Cassandra C. Ladino, Steven Tessler, and Lisa S. Zolly 2013. The United States Geological Survey Science Data Lifecycle Model. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1265, 4 p, http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20131265.

[Henry, 2014] Geneva Henry. 2014. Data Curation for the Humanities. Perspectives From Rice University. In: Ray, Joyce M. (ed). 2014. Research Data Management. Practical Strategies for Information Professionals. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, IN. 347-374.

[Higgins, 2008] Sarah, Higgins. 2008. The DCC Curation Lifecycle Model. The International Journal of Digital Curation. 3(1):134-140.

[Hinrichs et al., 2010] Marie Hinrichs, Thomas Zastrow and Erhard Hinrichs. 2010. WebLicht: Web-based LRT Services in a Distributed eScience Infrastructure. Paper presented at LREC 2010, Valetta, MT.

[Humphrey, 2006] Charles Humphrey.2006. E-science and the life cycle of research. Available at http://www.usit.uio.no/om/organisasjon/uav/itf/saker/forskningsdata/bakgrunn/life-cycle.pdf

[Kennan and Markauskaite, 2015] Kennan, Mary Anne and Lina Markauskaite. 2015. Research Data Management Practices: A Snapshot in Time. International Journal of Data Curation. 10(2):69-95.

[Lavoie, 2004] Brian F. Lavoie. 2004. The Open Archival Information System Reference Model: Introductory Guide. OCLC Online Computer Library Center.

[ICPSR, 2012] Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). (2012). Guide to Social Science Data Preparation and Archiving: Best Practice throughout the Data Life Cycle (5th ed.). Ann Arbor, MI. Available at http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/files/deposit/dataprep.pdf

[Sahle, 2015] Patrick Sahle. 2015. Forschungsdaten in den Geisteswissenschaften. SAGW Bulletin, 2015(4)4(2015):43-45.

[Starr and Gastl, 2011] Starr, Joan and Angela Gastl. 2011. A Metadata Scheme for DataCite. D-Lib Magazin, 17(1/2). doi:10.1045/january2011-starr

[Stöger et al., 2012] Herwig Stöger, Vittorio Muth - Georg Lasinger. 2012. epub.oeaw Benutzerhandbuch. Das Publikationsportal der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Vienna, AT. Available at http://epub.oeaw.ac.at/dokumentation14/0000_Epub.UserGuide_1.4_printable.pdf

[University of Oxford, 2014] University of Oxford. 2014. Policy on the Management of Research Data and Records. Oxford, UK. Available at http://researchdata.ox.ac.uk/files/2014/01/Policy_on_the_Management_of_Research_Data_and_Records.pdf

Citeringar i Crossref