原始資料至加值資料：人文資料移動中的摩擦力

Abstract

現今倡導開放科學的氛圍下，研究通透性（transparency）與資料分享、再用（sharing and reuse）實踐之重要性與時俱增；分享與再用議題中亦出現超越原始資料（primary data）、二次資料（secondary data）等界線的討論。不過，對於這些界線於開放科學的實踐，在領域中各文獻與權威機構的認定與闡述中並無明確規範，甚至存在歧異與重疊釋義，關於人文領域資料價值的再現（reproducibility）議題亦甚少討論。 本研究試圖彌補上述前人研究缺口，欲理解人文領域學者對於自身研究歷程中，投注於研究中資料的處理方式與資料加值（value-added data）後的分享再用行為模式，而在加值、分享與再用等行為之資料移動會包含哪些摩擦力（data friction）產生。本研究採用半結構深度訪談法，蒐集15位來自五所國立綜合大學之中國文學領域學者的訪談資料，並利用資料策管側寫檔案（Data Curation Profile Toolkit, DCP）工具製作訪談綱要，了解學者於人文資料利用的種類、組織方式、重視程度等；進一部探討上述關於資料發現與使用的移動過程中，資料摩擦力的生成如何影響學者研究經驗的變化。 綜整受訪者的資料使用經驗，首先可將人文資料移動情境，整理為資料性質改變與否、時間因素的過渡與相承等十一種移動方式與加值資料呈現；以及移動過程可能產生的資料摩擦力內外部現象，最後則是整理出影響學者資料分享與再用的因素種類與程度。研究發現受訪者資料移動的方式多樣且各移動間可能具有相承與連結作用，也表現出人文資料的不同研究階段所呈現的不同面貌，實難僅以原始、二次資料分類之；而資料摩擦力對於受訪者自身研究經歷的認知中，存在極少的負面感受與阻礙經驗，對於資料摩擦力概念的感受著重於資料移動的倡導，以及資料使用時的原始樣態價值訴求。 本研究透過實際深入理解學者於研究歷程中資料利用的情形，整理出人文資料的移動與加值狀態，呈現出人文資料獨特的價值意義；除了將資料摩擦力以實徵研究探索出內外部之具體意涵，更結合人文資料移動種類與狀態，進一步交叉對應並統整摩擦力發生的描述。希望藉此探索人文資料於學者的實際應用過程顯現，提供思考人文資料策管（data curation）的著重要點與品質方向。

As with the open science movement, the topics of research transparency as well as the data sharing and reuse practice are considered very important in academia recently. The concepts of data sharing and reuse increasingly emerge, which involve topics beyond the boundary of primary data and secondary data that information scientists usually perceived. Regarding these terms and practices in the context of open science, there are no clear definitions and norms mentioned in prior literature. In addition, there has been little discussion about awareness of data reproducibility in humanities. In order to bridge the research gaps, this study aims to explore how scholars in humanities “move” their data (from raw data to value-added data) during the course of their research, as well as the hinders, frictions, and motives regarding their data sharing and reuse practices. A semi-structured in-depth interview method was conducted with fifteen scholars, in Chinese literature fields, from five research universities and institutions in Taiwan. The interview protocol is partially adopted from the Data Curation Profile (DCP) Toolkit, which is used for capturing scholar’s data activities about “data movement”, organizational supports, and their perceptions of the data value that they handle. This study also identifies common types of data friction which occur in scholars' regular research process. The results reveal three overarching themes with eleven sub-groups of data movement, i.e., 1) non-transfiguration data movement, where the data stay the original mean without any change; 2) transfiguration, where the data are changed or value-added in terms of its forms, means, and shapes; and finally, 3) transition, where the data context changed over time. The study manages to synergize the eleven sub-groups of data movements with data friction and finds out effects of each movement can be inter-woven. It also seems to be difficult to classify types of data only by primary and secondary data. As for scholars’ perceptions about data friction concepts, several participants were found optimistic with more positive thoughts about how data friction can bring original value in their research data. A future prospection is to apply the study findings into the design of humanities’ data curation, sharing and reuse practices. The ultimate goal is to build up an in-depth supportive research data infrastructure for scholars in humanities.