Reusing Metadata with DDI 3 for Cross-Section to Complex Data

1. Group & Resource Package(+ Comparison)Potentials to re-use metadatawith DDI 3 for cross section to complex data Question & considerations from CESSDA PPP WP8 Data and Metadata infrastructures Uwe Jensen, GESIS Data Archive

2. Basic options to re-use of metadata in DDI 3 Group > inheritance mechanism Structure two or more studies > series (by design) or “ad-hoc” …. Commonalities > upper level (Group > Subgr. > Study Unit) inherited down the tree as long as … Differences > ADD or DELETE > lower level Resource Package > reference mechanism schemes that may be used outside of a Group structureby single Studies or grouped studies Rational: they are independent of a study (or related groups)

3. “Which modules to use for what purpose or situation” Re-use of metadata requires overview & decisions as several approaches are possible to structure metadata What life-cycle event and or process: exchange … - document by …;- publish & present by year, topic, languages, country; … - preservation … - tools design … What is common? What different? Study, Questions, Variables, ….. Sit. 0: Study (cross- section) Sit. 1: Group (+ comparison) Sit. 2: Resource Package (+ comparison) Sit. 3: Group & RP (+ comparison) Sit. 4: Standalone: Group or RP

4. Situation 1: Use of Group (& Comparison)Documentation of comparative studies when the basic standard is defined (captured, translated) Considered for: ex-ante (comparative by-design) for basic modular questions in relation to the fieldwork for transfer in the lifecycle like when the documentation is finished at that place / at that time (> from data producer to data provider) publication & presentation of a completed documentation Publish at a public portal > for Browsing in grouped structure Search for comparable items based on metadata from CM module Example: ISSP module questions, but … To discuss Advantage / Disadvantage not to use RP (with comparison; in addition) > estimate rate of expected / unexpected change

5. Situation 2: Use of Resource Package (& Comparison)Documentation of comparative or comparable studies, when the standard is defined or to be adjusted / changed Considered for: ex-post comparison of standardized / harmonised variables to create new harmonised variables ex-post (comparative after-the-fact) in relation to the fieldwork at an harmonisation project Published metadata repositories like question Example: like EB trend variables, but … Question: Advantage / Disadvantage not to use Group (+ Compar.)

6. Situation 3: Combined use of Group & RP (& CM) Considered for: Reuse of different schemes like for Questions, Variables, Codes etc. for comparative by design and adjustments after the fact (of the fieldwork) Comparison for ex-post harmonisation; Standardisation & documentation of changes over time … Basic example for exploration is the EB trend case as presented at IASSIST 2009 Question: Advantage / Disadvantage of this combined approach

7. Situation 4: Use of Resource Package (or Group) Considered for: Controlled Vocabs for inclusion in several documentation objects Substantial standards on several documentation objects for inclusion by reference (ISCO, ISO) Standard Demography

8. General (intermediate) conclusions Single Study (+ comparison) Use RP for metadata independent from the study Group (+ comparison) Use group > subgroup > study unit to organise dependent studies according to the study scope (comparative by design; ad-hoc by topics) Analyse commonalities > place on top / middle level (consider rel. studies) Analyse differences & deviation > Add or overwrite on lower levels Resource Package (+ comparison) for survey independent information (internal) or for to provide public access (e.g. Occupation; Countries; Demography) Group & RP (+ comparison) Combine approaches to document & manage complex metadata

9. Example: Group ISSP survey series with 10 Modules - Conceptual Component -- Data Collection - - Logical Product - - Archive Subgroup 2 – Environment Conceptual Component ….. Data Collection … Logical Product … Subgroup 1 Citizenship Sg 7 … Sg 6 … Sg 3 … Sg 5 … Sg 4 … Subgroup Year Subgroup Year 2000 Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Data Collection Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Logical Product Subgroup Year Study Unit Contry 1 Study Unit Country n Sg 8 … Sg 9 … Sg 9 … Sg 10 … Subgroup Year 1993 Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Data Collection Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Logical Product Subgroup Year Subgroup Year Study Unit Contry 1 Study Unit Contry n

10. One Subgroup for one Topical Module 1 to 10 Group ISSP survey series - Conceptual Component - Data Collection - Logical Product • Archive Resource Package (s) • for Substantial Standards: • Countries (ISO) • Regions (Nuts ...) • Employment (ISCO...) • Standard Demography • … Re-use from Resource Package Inclusion by reference • Subgroup Module 2 (Replication) • RoG I > II > III >IV > Cumulation • Conceptual Component … • concept scheme • Data Collection • Methodology • Question • Logical Product • Variables Schemes • Code Schemes • Series specific Resource package(s) for (basic) Ex-Ante Standard on • Universe > scheme • Concept > schemes • Questions > schemes • Variables > schemes • Series specific Resource package(s) for standard from Ex-Post harmonisation? • Religion, parties, … • Constructed Variables > schemes • Subgroup RoG I – 1986 - 6 Countries • StudyUnit Coutry1 • Add, delete specifics • StudyUnit Coutry2 • …. RoG II – 1990 – 10 Coutr. Build Integration RoG I-IV from Group / subgroup & Comparison & RP RoG III – 1996 – 27 C RoG IV – 2006 – 35 C