Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.7717/peerj.1242 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.7717/peerj.1242 C4579014!4579014 !26401453     free     free     free Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\26401453 .jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117       PeerJ 2015 ; 3 (ä): e1242 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=26401453 |t=2015. A game theoretic analysis of research data sharing |pdf=|usr=}}{{26401453 }} gab.com Text A game theoretic analysis of research data sharing JO: PeerJ http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26401453 #FOAvip While reusing research data has evident benefits for the scientific community as a whole, decisions to archive and share these data are primarily made by individual researchers. In this paper we analyse, within a game theoretical framework, how sharing and reuse of research data affect individuals who share or do not share their datasets. We construct a model in which there is a cost associated with sharing datasets whereas reusing such sets implies a benefit. In our calculations, conflicting interests appear for researchers. Individual researchers are always better off not sharing and omitting the sharing cost, at the same time both sharing and not sharing researchers are better off if (almost) all researchers share. Namely, the more researchers share, the more benefit can be gained by the reuse of those datasets. We simulated several policy measures to increase benefits for researchers sharing or reusing datasets. Results point out that, although policies should be able to increase the rate of sharing researchers, and increased discoverability and dataset quality could partly compensate for costs, a better measure would be to directly lower the cost for sharing, or even turn it into a (citation-) benefit. Making data available would in that case become the most profitable, and therefore stable, strategy. This means researchers would willingly make their datasets available, and arguably in the best possible way to enable reuse. Twit Text FOAVip A game theoretic analysis of research data sharing ????PeerJ http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26401453 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26401453 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|26401453 }}</ref> A game theoretic analysis of research data sharing #MMPMID26401453 Pronk TE ; Wiersma PH ; van Weerden A ; Schieving F PeerJ 2015[]; 3 (ä): e1242 PMID26401453 show ga While reusing research data has evident benefits for the scientific community as a whole, decisions to archive and share these data are primarily made by individual researchers. In this paper we analyse, within a game theoretical framework, how sharing and reuse of research data affect individuals who share or do not share their datasets. We construct a model in which there is a cost associated with sharing datasets whereas reusing such sets implies a benefit. In our calculations, conflicting interests appear for researchers. Individual researchers are always better off not sharing and omitting the sharing cost, at the same time both sharing and not sharing researchers are better off if (almost) all researchers share. Namely, the more researchers share, the more benefit can be gained by the reuse of those datasets. We simulated several policy measures to increase benefits for researchers sharing or reusing datasets. Results point out that, although policies should be able to increase the rate of sharing researchers, and increased discoverability and dataset quality could partly compensate for costs, a better measure would be to directly lower the cost for sharing, or even turn it into a (citation-) benefit. Making data available would in that case become the most profitable, and therefore stable, strategy. This means researchers would willingly make their datasets available, and arguably in the best possible way to enable reuse. äA game theoretic analysis of research data sharing (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing