
This guidebook was developed following a training workshop called 'Hard to Share Data in the Social Sciences and Humanities and using the Secure ANalysis Environment (SANE)' held at the DANS Offices in The Hague on 27 March 2025. About the guide: Sensitive data can often not be made openly accessible or even just shared with, or sent to,other researchers. There are many possible reasons for this, for example because there are commercial or security constraints. In this guide we focus on exploring the types of non-personal sensitive data, as well as providing some case studies with possible solutions. The guide addresses the particular challenges involved in sharing non-personal sensitive data in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). We refer to the word ‘sharing’ primarily in reference to ‘giving access to others’: ranging from sharing data with colleagues to publishing in a data repository. However, sharing can also refer to activities that involve taking access, for instance analysing data that have been generated by others; for that aspect we include, towards the end of this guide, a section on the use of the Secure ANalysis Environment (SANE) secure environment for accessing data safely. The guide opens with an explanation of different types of 'hard-to-share' research data in the SSH. It outlines best practices around managing and sharing these types of data in relation to the FAIR Principles and Open Science. It presents the thoughts of some the the many types of skilled and knowledgeable professionals who are involved in managing and sharing hard-to-share data in the SSH. Importantly, a series of case studies provide real-world insights and inspiration on how to work with hard-to-share data. Importantly for researchers seeking practical solutions for sharing these types of data, the guide introduces SANE, demonstrating how sensitive data can be made accessible for inspection and analysis without allowing downloads. Related materials: Thorpe, D.E., van den Berk, M., Flohr, P., van der Meer, L., Hesam, A., Campbell, R., Oberheim, F. (2025), ‘Workshop on Hard to Share Data in the Social Sciences and Humanities and using the Secure ANalysis Environment (SANE)’. Zenodo.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15302953 During the workshop, there was a presentation authored by Pascal Flohr and Adam Benfer. An almost identical version of the presentation is published here: Flohr, P. (2024, July 10). Sharing location data: Sensitive data in archaeology. Where do I start with FAIRification of sensitive data?, Online. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12706680 The other workshops in this series of training workshops on 'hard-to-share data in the social sciences and humanities' are listed below and also generated two accompanying guidebooks: Lushaj, B., Gelens, T., Magraw, J.-Y., Mos, A., Baloum, R.-C., & Hati Gitundu, (Beatrice) B. (2025). Workshop on The Ethics of Sharing Fieldwork Data and the CARE Principles. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15629394 Lushaj, Bora et al. (2025). ‘The Ethics of Sharing Fieldwork Data and the CARE Principles’, Zenodo.Reserved DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17588886 Flohr, P., van den Berk, M., Roodhof, A., Verheijen, J., Bruil, M., Thorpe, D.E. (2025), ‘Workshop - Sharing Field Notes’. Zenodo.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15600311Flohr, P., Roodhof, A. (2025). ‘Sharing Field Notes’, Zenodo. Reserved DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17588823 Acknowledgements: This publication was part of the project ‘Beyond personal data: a new initiative to support early-career researchers with hard-to-share data’ with file number ICT.TDCC.001.002, which is (partly) financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO) via the Thematic Digital Competence Centre Social Sciences & Humanities (TDCC-SSH). We would like to thank the invited speakers and the participants of the workshop, as well as the contributors and reviewers of this guide.
FAIR principles, data sharing, research data
FAIR principles, data sharing, research data
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
