Wayne State University DMP evaluation - Readme file Table of Contents 1. Files in the dataset, and short description of each 2. Contact information for investigators 3. Date that the file was created 4. Method description 5. Links to publications that cite or use the data 6. Recommended citation for the data 7. Variables and data coding 1. Files in the dataset 1a. WSU-DMP-Evaluation-dataset.csv: analysis of the contents of (119) DMPs submitted to the NSF by Wayne State University researchers between 2012 and 2014. Record 1 is header information; each of the records from 2 through 120 represent coded evaluation of the content of a DMP, with variables and coding described in 7. below. 1b. Readme-WSU-DMP-Evaluation.txt: description of the .csv file content, organization and methodology 2. Contact information for investigators: 2a. James E. Van Loon, Science Librarian, Wayne State University, jevanloon@wayne.edu 2b. Katherine G. Akers, Biomedical Research and Data Specialist, Wayne State University, katherine.akers@wayne.edu 2c. Cole Hudson, Digital Publishing Librarian, Wayne State University, Cole.Hudson@wayne.edu 2d. Alexandra Sarkozy, Learning and Research Support Librarian, Wayne State University, alexandra.sarkozy@wayne.edu 3. Date of file creation November 7, 2016 4. Method description Fields 1-4 of each record contain descriptive information about the DMP; fields 5-19 contain rating (consensed by two investigators) of the quality of a DMP element using the rubric described in 7. below. 5. Links to publications that cite or use the data 6. Recommended citation for this data 7. Variables and coding: ID An integer which uniquely identifies the NSF proposal and Wayne State researcher; mapping from ID to proposal/researcher is maintained separately from the dataset. College The Wayne State University college or school with which the proposal/researcher is affiliated. Department The Wayne State University academic department with which the proposal/researcher is affiliated. Status funded = successful application; received NSF funding for this proposal declined = unsuccessful application; did not receive NSF funding for this proposal 1. Are the individual(s) responsible for data management specifically named (or referred to as “the PI”)? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 2. Is the total amount of expected data and/or expected rate of data generation specified? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 3. Are the file formats of expected data specified (e.g., file extensions, name of data collection software)? 0 = no/not clear 1 = general description (e.g., mass spectrometry data) 2 = specific description (e.g., file extensions, software used) 3 = both general and specific description 4. Will specific metadata standards and/or other description methods (e.g., readme files, codebooks, and lab notebooks) be used? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 5. Is a method of data backup (e.g., RAID, remote backup, external hard drive) specified? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 6. Will any data and/or code be made accessible after the study? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 7. Is the duration of data/code preservation specified? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 8. Will data/code be provided (e.g., emailed) upon request? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 9. Will data/code be posted on personal or project-specific website or database? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 10. Will data be shared via journal articles or conference presentations? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 11. Will data/code be submitted to journals as supplemental material? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 12. Will data be deposited in a dedicated data repository/archive? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 13. Are policies for data re-use or redistribution specified? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 14. Do policies for data access and sharing specify protections against disclosure of sensitive information? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear 15. Do policies for data access and sharing specify protections for safeguarding intellectual property rights? 1 = yes 0 = no/not clear