Choices, choices… is CORD always the right repository?
17/07/2018
As publishers and funders increasingly require that data used in your journal articles is published and cited, you might feel a bit overwhelmed at the options for doing this. Different organisations have different practices and there are various repository options out there. (For example, Springer has partnered with figshare, but Elsevier recommends using Mendeley Data). Does it really matter where your data is? Don’t we all just want to use the easiest and quickest solution?
Fundamentally, as long as data is published in a repository that meets funder and University requirements, it doesn’t usually matter which repository it is. Two crucial factors are long-term preservation of the data (10years+) and the assignment of a persistent identifier to the dataset (usually a DOI). The data description should also be open and discoverable online, with appropriate access restrictions and links to corresponding papers, etc.
If your funder specifies a repository to use (e.g. the UK Data Archive for ESRC work, or a NERC or BBSRC repository), that’s obviously the one to choose. Otherwise, CORD, our institutional repository, is a very safe bet and our repository of choice – that’s why we implemented it, after all! By sticking with CORD, you only need to be familiar with one system and process. You can use it for any research output with the relevant access control and reserve your DOI in advance, to use in your paper.
Because CORD is our institutional repository, it’s a nice solution as we have control over it, including terms, conditions, costs, openness, retention periods, data exports, free in-house support, etc, and it creates our central portal where we showcase our work to external partners, and generate our institutional metrics. You then just have one repository to use for all outputs independent of publisher or project, and will soon be using CORD at warp speed to upload data and other research outputs. In published papers, you can still simply link to your underlying data on CORD where that is the most appropriate repository – there should be no need to have to learn different repositories/processes.
Need any more help with CORD? Get in touch with us by emailing researchdata@cranfield.ac.uk.
Categories & Tags:
Leave a comment on this post:
You might also like…
My Cranfield Journey: A Global Product Development Adventure
Hi everyone! My name is Salma Aboujaafar, and I’ve just completed my MSc in Global Product Development and Management (GPD&M). I’m Moroccan, but I’m currently based in France, and my studies ...
My Journey in Aerospace: From Taiwan to Cranfield
Meet Mei-Ying Teng, a recent Aerospace Computational Engineering MSc graduate. Originally from Taiwan, Mei’s passion for aerospace research led her to choose Cranfield for its unique focus in the field. Hi ...
Changes to the Factiva interface
The eagle-eyed amongst you may have noticed that the Factiva homepage has changed and we are no longer taken directly to the search forms that we traditionally use. To access these, you need to open ...
A Deep Dive into Cranfield’s MSc in Management and Information Systems
Elena Cuatrecasas Schmitz graduated with a master’s degree in Management and Information Systems in 2023. The Spanish-born student now resides in Barcelona and shares her transformative academic journey. In 2023, I ...
My Cranfield Adventure: From Italy to the Global Manufacturing Stage
Alessia Paoletti, a recent graduate of the Engineering and Management of Manufacturing Systems (EMMS) MSc programme at Cranfield University, shares her transformative academic journey. I recently completed the Engineering and Management ...
New edition of the APA7 Author-Date referencing guide published
We have issued a second edition of the APA7 Author-Date referencing guide. The updated edition contains an enhanced introduction written in association with the academic language support team. It includes guidance on why and when ...