The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowledge Infrastructures Are Growing Up: The Case for Institutional (Data) Repositories 10 Years After the Holdren Memo
Open accessAbstract
Institutional data repositories are uniquely positioned to support researchers in sharing scholarly outputs. As funding agencies develop and institute policies for research data access and sharing, institutional data repositories have emerged as a critical feature in ecosystems for data stewardship and sharing. We show that institutional data repositories can meet and exceed the requirements and recommendations of federal data policy, thereby maximizing the benefits of data sharing. We present results of a mixed-method study which explores the adoption and usage of institutional repositories to share data from 2017 to 2023. Data from two previous studies were combined with data collected in 2023 on the data sharing solutions of Association of Research Libraries member institutions in the United States and Canada. The analysis of the aggregated data indicates that data stewardship has increased in both institutional repositories and institutional data repositories with an increase in complementary infrastructure to support data sharing. We then conduct an “infrastructural inversion” (Bowker & Star, 1999) to ‘surface invisible work’ of making data repositories function well, and demonstrate that institutional data repositories have advantages for providing sustainable stewardship, curation, and sharing of research data. Finally, we show that institutional data repositories may produce additional benefits through established infrastructure, local interoperability, and control.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A recent systematic review found that the use of IRs in academia in the past decade has been structured around compliance with federal policies that reflect Western epistemological frameworks (Narlock et al., 2024).”
From From Access to Agency: Reframing Digital Libraries as Community Repositories for Community-Engaged Research Partnerships (2026) · cites this paper as Narlock et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship
Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J.-W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., et al. (2016) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18 · Cited by 18,423
The CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance
Carroll, S. R., Garba, I., Figueroa-Rodríguez, O. L., Holbrook, J., Lovett, R., Materechera, S., Parsons, M., Raseroka, K., Rodriguez-Lonebear, D., Rowe, R., et al. (2020) · Data Science Journal · doi:10.5334/dsj-2020-043 · Cited by 1,408
Research works printed but not linked: 26
- 2022, ‘Why it takes a village to manage and share data’, Harvard Data Science Review, 4
- 1999, Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences
- 2005, Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, 237
- 2024, ‘Measuring data rot: An analysis of the continued availability of shared data from a Single University’, PLoS ONE, 19
- CoreTrustSeal Standards And Certification Board, 2022, CoreTrustSeal requirements 2023–2025
- 2020, ‘The impact of institutional repositories: a systematic review’, Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 108, 177
- Edwards, P.N., Jackson, S.J., Chalmers, M.K., Bowker, G.C., Borgman, C.L., Ribes, D., Burton, M. and Calvert, S. (2013) Knowledge infrastructures: Intellectual frameworks and research challenges. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/97552.
- 2023, ‘Why NASA and federal agencies are declaring this the Year of Open Science’, Nature, 613
- 2017, ‘“Watch your language!”: Word choice in library website usability’, Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 12
- 2008, ‘What’s in a name? Using card sorting to evaluate branding in an academic library’s web site’, College & Research Libraries, 69, 242, 10.5860/crl.69.3.242 · DOI
- Herndon, J. and O’Reilly, R. (2016) ‘Data sharing policies in social sciences academic journals: Evolving expectations of data sharing as a form of scholarly communication’, in L. Kellam and K. Thompson (eds.) Databrarianship: The Academic data librarian in theory and practice. Association of College and Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association, pp. 219–243. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10161/12792.
- 2017, SPEC Kit 354: Data curation, Association of Research Libraries
- Johnston, L.R. and Coburn, L. (2020, January 15). Data sharing readiness in academic institutions. Data Curation Network. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/11299/211358.
- 2019, ‘Investigation of challenges in academic institutional repositories: A survey of academic librarians’, Library Hi Tech, 37, 525, 10.1108/LHT-12-2017-0266 · DOI
- 2017, ‘Persistence Statements: Describing Digital Stickiness’, Data Science Journal, 16, 39
- 2020, ‘The TRUST Principles for digital repositories’, Scientific Data, 7
- 2003, ‘Institutional repositories: essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age’, Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3, 327, 10.1353/pla.2003.0039 · DOI
- 2023, ‘Understanding the value of curation: A survey of researcher perspectives of data curation services from six US institutions’, PLOS ONE, 18
- 2019, ‘Ten principles for machine-actionable data management plans’, PLOS Computational Biology, 15
- 2023, Data for “Knowledge Infrastructures Are Growing Up: The Case for Institutional (Data) Repositories 10 Years After the Holdren Memo
- 2019, ‘Uses and reuses of scientific data: The data creators’ advantage’, Harvard Data Science Review, 1
- 2007, ‘Innkeeper at the roach motel’, Library Trends, 57, 98
- 1999, ‘Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work’, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 8, 9
- 2014, ‘Who is citing undergraduate theses in institutional digital repositories? implications for scholarship and information literacy’, College & Undergraduate Libraries, 21, 345
- 2023, ‘Disappearing repositories: Taking an infrastructure perspective on the long-term availability of research data’, Quantitative Science Studies, 4, 839, 10.1162/qss_a_00277 · DOI
- White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), 2022, Desirable characteristics of data repositories for federally funded research, 10.5479/10088/113528 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tharani, K. (2026) · Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · doi:10.21083/partnership.v21i1.8775
Metadata
- Authors
- Narlock, M. R., Calvert, S., Taylor, S., Marquez, R. P., & Parkman, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
- Association of Research Libraries (US)
- East Carolina University (US)
- Tulane University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Narlock, Mikala R.
- Venue
- Data Science Journal
- Publisher
- Ubiquity Press, Ltd.
- Published
- 2024
- Volume
- 23
- ISSN
- 1683-1470 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4402883940
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 3.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Data Science Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University of Minnesota
- University at Buffalo
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Data Analysis and Archiving
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Optics and Image Analysis
- Keywords
- institutional data repository, research data sharing, data stewardship, research data policy, data curation, research libraries, interoperability, data infrastructure, knowledge infrastructure
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