Trust in Digital Repositories
ISO 16363:2012, Space Data and Information Transfer Systems - Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (ISO TRAC), outlines actions a repository can take to be considered trustworthy, but research examining whether the repository’s designated community of users associates such a...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Edinburgh
2013-06-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Digital Curation |
| Online Access: | https://129.215.67.1/ijdc/article/view/251 |
| _version_ | 1797393164825264128 |
|---|---|
| author | Elizabeth Yakel Ixchel M. Faniel Adam Kriesberg Ayoung Yoon |
| author_facet | Elizabeth Yakel Ixchel M. Faniel Adam Kriesberg Ayoung Yoon |
| author_sort | Elizabeth Yakel |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ISO 16363:2012, Space Data and Information Transfer Systems - Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (ISO TRAC), outlines actions a repository can take to be considered trustworthy, but research examining whether the repository’s designated community of users associates such actions with trustworthiness has been limited. Drawing from this ISO document and the management and information systems literatures, this paper discusses findings from interviews with 66 archaeologists and quantitative social scientists. We found similarities and differences across the disciplines and among the social scientists. Both disciplinary communities associated trust with a repository’s transparency. However, archaeologists mentioned guarantees of preservation and sustainability more frequently than the social scientists, who talked about institutional reputation. Repository processes were also linked to trust, with archaeologists more frequently citing metadata issues and social scientists discussing data selection and cleaning processes. Among the social scientists, novices mentioned the influence of colleagues on their trust in repositories almost twice as much as the experts. We discuss the implications our findings have for identifying trustworthy repositories and how they extend the models presented in the management and information systems literatures.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-03-08T23:59:14Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e5e40ffa003e4347b7b3df9d8a1622e4 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1746-8256 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-08T23:59:14Z |
| publishDate | 2013-06-01 |
| publisher | University of Edinburgh |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Digital Curation |
| spelling | doaj.art-e5e40ffa003e4347b7b3df9d8a1622e42023-12-12T23:52:00ZengUniversity of EdinburghInternational Journal of Digital Curation1746-82562013-06-0181Trust in Digital RepositoriesElizabeth YakelIxchel M. FanielAdam KriesbergAyoung YoonISO 16363:2012, Space Data and Information Transfer Systems - Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (ISO TRAC), outlines actions a repository can take to be considered trustworthy, but research examining whether the repository’s designated community of users associates such actions with trustworthiness has been limited. Drawing from this ISO document and the management and information systems literatures, this paper discusses findings from interviews with 66 archaeologists and quantitative social scientists. We found similarities and differences across the disciplines and among the social scientists. Both disciplinary communities associated trust with a repository’s transparency. However, archaeologists mentioned guarantees of preservation and sustainability more frequently than the social scientists, who talked about institutional reputation. Repository processes were also linked to trust, with archaeologists more frequently citing metadata issues and social scientists discussing data selection and cleaning processes. Among the social scientists, novices mentioned the influence of colleagues on their trust in repositories almost twice as much as the experts. We discuss the implications our findings have for identifying trustworthy repositories and how they extend the models presented in the management and information systems literatures. https://129.215.67.1/ijdc/article/view/251 |
| spellingShingle | Elizabeth Yakel Ixchel M. Faniel Adam Kriesberg Ayoung Yoon Trust in Digital Repositories International Journal of Digital Curation |
| title | Trust in Digital Repositories |
| title_full | Trust in Digital Repositories |
| title_fullStr | Trust in Digital Repositories |
| title_full_unstemmed | Trust in Digital Repositories |
| title_short | Trust in Digital Repositories |
| title_sort | trust in digital repositories |
| url | https://129.215.67.1/ijdc/article/view/251 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT elizabethyakel trustindigitalrepositories AT ixchelmfaniel trustindigitalrepositories AT adamkriesberg trustindigitalrepositories AT ayoungyoon trustindigitalrepositories |