Wayne State University - NSF DMP Evaluation

Principal Investigator(s):  View help for Principal Investigator(s) James E. Van Loon, Wayne State University; Katherine G. Akers, Wayne State University; Cole Hudson, Wayne State University; Alexandra Sarkozy, Wayne State University

Version:  View help for Version V1

Name File Type Size Last Modified
Readme-WSU-DMP-Evaluation.txt text/plain 4.5 KB 06/25/2018 10:45:AM
WSU-DMP-Evaluation-dataset.csv text/csv 10.5 KB 06/25/2018 10:46:AM

Project Citation: 

Van Loon, James E., Akers, Katherine G., Hudson, Cole, and Sarkozy, Alexandra. Wayne State University - NSF DMP Evaluation. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2018-06-25. https://doi.org/10.3886/E100300V1

Project Description

Summary:  View help for Summary To determine the overall quality of Data Management Plans (DMPs) at Wayne State University, the Library System’s Research Data Services (RDS) team evaluated the content of 119 DMPs from grant proposals submitted to the National Science Foundation by Wayne State University researchers between 2012 and 2014.



Scope of Project

Subject Terms:  View help for Subject Terms DMP
Time Period(s):  View help for Time Period(s) 2012 – 2014
Universe:  View help for Universe All NSF proposals submitted by Wayne State University researchers between 2012 and 2014.
Data Type(s):  View help for Data Type(s) other

Methodology

Sampling:  View help for Sampling Convenience sample of (119) data management plans, including roughly equal number of funded/unfunded proposals.
Data Source:  View help for Data Source Access to the text of NSF submissions was facilitated by WSU's Office of Sponsored Programs Administration (SPA).
Scales:  View help for Scales The DMPs were evaluated using a modified version of a rubric previously used by researchers at the University of Michigan (Nicholls et al., 2014; Samuel et al., 2015). Our rubric consisted of 15 items addressing the inclusion of information requested by the NSF (National Science Foundation, 2014) and other common pieces of information often found in DMPs. Two evaluators independently applied the rubric to each DMP, and any inconsistencies between evaluators were discussed and ultimately reconciled



Related Publications

This study is un-published. See below for other available versions.

Published Versions

V2 [2018-06-25]

Export Metadata

Dublin Core

DDI 2.5

Report a Problem

Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.

This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.