CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 140Research Data Management PracticesLibrary Science and InformationOptics and Image Analysis

Maturing research data services and the transformation of academic libraries

Open access
Cox, Andrew M., Kennan, Mary Anne, Lyon, Liz, Pinfield, Stephen, Sbaffi, Laura·2019·Journal of Documentation
DOI 10.1108/jd-12-2018-0211
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: A major development in academic libraries in the last decade has been recognition of the need to support research data management (RDM). The purpose of this paper is to capture how library research data services (RDS) have developed and to assess the impact of this on the nature of academic libraries. Design/methodology/approach: Questionnaire responses from libraries in Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the UK and USA from 2018 are compared to a previous data set from 2014. Findings: The evidence supports a picture of the spread of RDS, especially advisory ones. However, future ambitions do not seem to have seen much evolution. There is limited evidence of organisational change and skills shortages remain. Most service development can be explained as the extension of traditional library services to research data. Yet there remains the potential for transformational impacts, when combined with the demands implied by other new services such as around text and data mining, bibliometrics and artificial intelligence. A revised maturity model is presented that summarises typical stages of development of services, structures and skills. Research limitations/implications: The research models show how RDS are developing. It also reflects on the extent to which RDM represents a transformation of the role of academic libraries. Practical implications: Practitioners working in the RDM arena can benchmark their current practices and future plans against wider patterns. Originality/value: The study offers a clear picture of the evolution of research data services internationally and proposes a maturity model to capture typical stages of development. It contributes to the wider discussion of how the nature of academic libraries are changing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/jd-12-2018-0211

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior research outlines services, competencies and lifecycle functions but offers limited explanation of how responsibilities are structured into distinct yet interconnected roles.

    “Prior research outlines services, competencies and lifecycle functions but offers limited explanation of how responsibilities are structured into distinct yet interconnected roles.”

    From Librarians’ roles and responsibilities in managing data within academic libraries: A role-based data governance model (2026) · cites this paper as Cox et al., 2019b

    The Literature review and Determinants of service provision sections outline research data services, skills and stages of service development. Structures and skills also distinguishes individual, distributed and team responsibility, while noting that its survey question may not capture complex organisational structures. The paper therefore offers some explanation of how responsibilities are organised, but does not explain how distinct roles interconnect in detail; the claim understates that organisational analysis. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • While IT units manage infrastructure, librarians coordinate service-level functions, acting as knowledge orchestrators who connect people, systems, and data.

    “While IT units manage infrastructure, librarians coordinate service-level functions, acting as knowledge orchestrators who connect people, systems, and data (Cox et al., 2019a(Cox et al., , 2019b)).”

    From Librarians’ roles and responsibilities in managing data within academic libraries: A role-based data governance model (2026) · cites this paper as Cox et al., 2019b

    The service-development section reports that libraries mainly offered advisory services, and the literature review and discussion describe collaboration with IT centres and other campus units (page numbers unavailable). The paper does not establish the claimed division in which IT units manage infrastructure while librarians coordinate service-level functions, or characterize librarians as knowledge orchestrators connecting people, systems, and data. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Laskowski (2021) and Cox et al. (2019b) highlight librarians' roles in risk management, policy development, and compliance frameworks.

    “Laskowski (2021) and Cox et al. (2019b) highlight librarians' roles in risk management, policy development, and compliance frameworks.”

    From Librarians’ roles and responsibilities in managing data within academic libraries: A role-based data governance model (2026) · cites this paper as Cox et al. (2019b)

    The 'Reviewing the maturity model' section says RDM policy development is collaborative, while the 'Drivers and challenges' section identifies compliance with funder policy as a major driver of library services. These passages support librarians' involvement in policy-related work and compliance, but do not describe a risk-management role or say librarians develop compliance frameworks. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • This aligns with Cox et al. (2017, 2019b) and Tang & Hu (2019), who describe librarians as facilitators and brokers.

    “This aligns with Cox et al. (2017Cox et al. ( , 2019b) ) and Tang & Hu (2019), who describe librarians as facilitators and brokers.”

    From Librarians’ roles and responsibilities in managing data within academic libraries: A role-based data governance model (2026) · cites this paper as Cox et al., 2019b

  • These findings are consistent with previous studies that position libraries as key actors in data governance and sustainability.

    “These findings are consistent with previous studies that position libraries as key actors in data governance and sustainability.”

    From Librarians’ roles and responsibilities in managing data within academic libraries: A role-based data governance model (2026) · cites this paper as Cox et al. (2019b)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 25 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bryant, R., Lavoie, B. and Malpas, C. (2017), The Realities of Research Data Management: Part Two: Scoping the University RDM Service Bundle , OCLC, Dublin, OH, available at: http://doi.org/10.2 5333/C3Z039

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cox, A. M., Kennan, M. A., Lyon, L., Pinfield, S., & Sbaffi, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Charles Sturt University (AU)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Cox, Andrew M.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Documentation
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2019-09-26
Volume
75
Issue
6
Pages
1432-1462
ISSN
0022-0418 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/jd-12-2018-0211
OpenAlex
W2963526428
Cited by
139
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2016: 1
FWCI
20.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Documentation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Charles Sturt University Research Output (CRO) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Optics and Image Analysis
Keywords
research data services, research data management, academic libraries, library service development, maturity model, organizational change, text and data mining, bibliometric analysis, artificial intelligence, international comparison of libraries

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review