Data Access

CRE Analysis

5. Potential for misinterpretation of data.

Comment by Association of American Universities

CRE Response:

Had the law been changed to require that researchers explain the data they are required to disclose, then the burden on researchers would have been considerably greater, and the law would have been criticized in this regard. As proposed, the revisions to Circular A-110 do not require researchers to explain the data, only to make it available to the public under FOIA. CRE has recommended that, in cases where such explanation truly required, that reasonable cost reimbursement should be provided to the researcher or other awardee if the data requester obtains assistance from the researcher in understanding the data.

With respect to the threat of misinterpretation, if the data are not released until after publication of the research results, then the researcher will have had opportunity to explain the data in the publication. Also, the potential for misinterpretation of raw data may lead investigators to more fully document the methods employed in the production of published results. These methods, if more detailed than those provided in the publication, might be provided as part of the requested data.

Finally, criticism is part of the traditional checks and balances of the scientific process. Researchers who believe their work has been misinterpreted or misrepresented can respond in a subsequent publication.