Patterns in paradata preferences among the makers and reusers of archaeological data

Abstract

Knowledge of data reusers' and makers' preferences of data that describe processes and practices (paradata) remains limited, especially concerning broader patterns of such priorities. The aim of this study is to address this gap. Drawing on an exploratory factor analysis of a survey of makers and users of archaeological data, the study investigates 1) what patterns related to types of informational content can be identified in data makers' and users’ views of the usefulness of specific types of paradata, 2) how the patterns differ between data makers and users, and 3) how the patterns can be explained in terms of information needs and preferences. The findings show that paradata preferences are patterned and there are differences between data-makers and data-users ideas of what is useful. However, the differences limit to details that make data related processes and practices understandable rather than to the broader patterns of what types of information is needed. We identified five broad categories of uses for paradata (Data collection procedures and tools, Data in context, Standards and guidelines, Credentials, Data processing), and corresponding, applicable types of paradata. The findings point also to indicative possibilities of linking paradata preferences to orientational, contextualising and content-oriented data practices. From a practical perspective, this study underlines the importance of approaching paradata not as a monolith but rather as an arrangement that is structured by different understandings of (para)data and how it is acted upon. Instead of caring for paradata in general, it is crucial to engage with specific types of paradata for different data practices. Keywords: paradata, archaeology, data management, data reuse, research data management.