TY - JOUR
T1 - Exposing standardization and consistency issues in repository metadata requirements for data deposition
AU - Kim, Jihyun
AU - Yakel, Elizabeth
AU - Faniel, Ixchel M.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was made possible in part by a National Leadership Grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services, LG-06-10-0140-10, “Dissemination Information Packages for Information Reuse” (DIPIR), with support from OCLC and the University of Michigan School of Information. We thank members of the DIPIR team, including University of Michigan students, research fellows, institutional partners, and individual collaborators. We also thank manuscript reviewers and editors for their insightful comments and suggestions.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Jihyun Kim, Elizabeth Yakel, and OCLC, Attribution 4.0 International.
PY - 2019/9
Y1 - 2019/9
N2 - We examine common and unique metadata requirements and their levels of description, determined by the data deposit forms of 20 repositories in three disciplines-archaeology, quantitative social science, and zoology. The results reveal that requirements relating to Creator, Description, Contributor, Date, Relation, and Location are common, whereas those regarding Publisher and Language are rarely listed across the disciplines. Data-level descriptions are more common than study- and file-level descriptions. The results suggest that repositories should require detailed study-level descriptions and information about data usage licenses and access rights. Moreover, repositories should determine metadata requirements in a standardized and consistent manner.
AB - We examine common and unique metadata requirements and their levels of description, determined by the data deposit forms of 20 repositories in three disciplines-archaeology, quantitative social science, and zoology. The results reveal that requirements relating to Creator, Description, Contributor, Date, Relation, and Location are common, whereas those regarding Publisher and Language are rarely listed across the disciplines. Data-level descriptions are more common than study- and file-level descriptions. The results suggest that repositories should require detailed study-level descriptions and information about data usage licenses and access rights. Moreover, repositories should determine metadata requirements in a standardized and consistent manner.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073395621&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5860/crl.80.6.843
DO - 10.5860/crl.80.6.843
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85073395621
SN - 0010-0870
VL - 80
SP - 843
EP - 875
JO - College and Research Libraries
JF - College and Research Libraries
IS - 6
ER -