Jump to content

Draft:TRUST Principles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TRUST Principles

[edit]

The TRUST Principles (Transparency, Responsibility, User Focus, Sustainability, and Technology) are a foundational framework designed to promote the trustworthiness of digital repositories and ensure reliable, long-term, and user-centered data stewardship across disciples. Developed through community collaboration and first formalized by Lin et al. in 2020, the principles aim to unify best practices in digital preservation and data management globally.

Overview

[edit]

The TRUST Principles provide high-level guidance for repository stakeholders, including researchers, data curators, librarians, policymakers, and repository managers. They are intended to support sustainable and transparent practices in managing digital data, particularly for research purposes. The framework has gained international recognition and is often cited alongside other major standards in data management, such as FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) and CARE (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, and Ethics) Principles.

Origins and Development

[edit]

The TRUST Principles were developed by members of the Research Data Alliance (RDA) and other international stakeholders in response to increasing concerns around the long-term reliability and governance of digital repositories[1]. They build upon existing certification frameworks like CoreTrustSeal, aiming to offer a more accessible and broadly applicable guideline for establishing repository credibility and fostering cross-disciplinary data reuse. The TRUST Principles were initially discussed in the article The TRUST Principles for Digital Repositories by Lin et al. (2020)[2]. A follow-up article by Lin et al. (2024)[3] elaborates on how the principles help unify repository practices by offering shared expectations for sustainability and communication between stakeholders.

Core Components

[edit]

Transparency

[edit]

Transparency involves openly communicating a repository's mission, scope, policies, and technical practices. This includes publishing terms of use, metadata standards, preservation policies, and curation strategies. Transparency supports user trust and enables repository interoperability. Surveys (e.g., Platt et al., 2022[4]) indicate that many biomedical repositories incorporate transparency by requiring contributor credentialing and provenance tracking.

Responsibility

[edit]

Responsibility pertains to the repository’s accountability for its data holdings and the communities it serves. This includes maintaining metadata standards, intellectual property management, and ensuring long-term stewardship. Repositories demonstrate responsibility through practices such as using controlled terminologies and offering machine-readable formats, although consistent certification remains limited.

User Focus

[edit]

A user-focused repository designs its services with diverse stakeholder needs in mind, including researchers, funders, and data curators. This entails building intuitive user interfaces, supporting data discoverability, and engaging with the broader community. Carrillo et al. (2022[5]) highlight the TRUST Principles’ role in bridging communication gaps between repositories and their audiences and enhancing user participation in trust-building.

Sustainability

[edit]

Sustainability addresses long-term access and the ongoing viability of repositories. It involves securing funding, disaster recovery planning, and governance frameworks. Many scholarly works have referenced the TRUST Principles when discussing sustainability, particularly within the context of open science and digital preservation (e.g., Schmitt et al., 2023[6]; Mc Cartney et al., 2023[7]; Virapongse et al., 2024[8]).

Technology

[edit]

The technology component emphasizes the use of robust, secure, and adaptable technological infrastructures. Repositories are expected to adopt current best practices in data management, ensure interoperability, and protect against cyber threats. Citations relating to this principle often focus on emerging technologies such as AI, machine learning, and digital twin systems (Baraldi et al., 2023[9]; Pias et al., 2025[10]).

Adoption and Impact

[edit]

The TRUST Principles have been widely adopted across multiple scientific and academic disciplines. They are commonly used to assess and improve repository practices, inform data governance frameworks, and guide the selection of trusted repositories for data deposition. They have influenced policy development by funders and government bodies, and their impact spans multiple languages and cultural contexts, including publications in English, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Ukrainian, Italian, and Slovenian.

The integration of the TRUST Principles with frameworks like FAIR and CARE (Devine, 2024[11]) reflects a holistic approach to research data management that accounts for both technical and ethical considerations.

[edit]

Journal classifications were determined using the DFG subject area structure to assess the disciplinary distribution of publications referencing the TRUST Principles. The majority of these journals are situated within the Life Sciences, including disciplines such as Biology, Medicine, and Agriculture. A substantial portion of publications also appears in journals classified under the Humanities and Social Sciences. Additional representation is found in the Natural Sciences, particularly in Chemistry and Geoscience, and in the Engineering Sciences, notably in Computer Science, Systems Engineering, and Electrical Engineering.

Publication and Dissemination

[edit]

Journals and conference proceedings play a crucial role in disseminating research related to the TRUST Principles. The journals that have cited the principles most frequently include Frontiers, Science Data, and Data Science Journal. Additionally, university repositories, conference proceedings, and dissertations contribute to the expanding body of literature referencing TRUST. These citations highlight the broad relevance and interdisciplinary nature of the principles in guiding digital preservation strategies.

[edit]
  1. Zotero TRUST Principles Working Group Library
  2. RDA/WDS TRUST Principles Outreach and Adoption Working Group

References

[edit]
  1. ^ RDA Research Data Alliance (2021-12-10). BoF OA Sponsored The future of "trustworthiness" and reliability of repositories and services Trus (Video). Retrieved 2025-05-07 – via YouTube.
  2. ^ Lin, Dawei; Crabtree, Jonathan; Dillo, Ingrid; Downs, Robert R.; Edmunds, Rorie; Giaretta, David; De Giusti, Marisa; L’Hours, Hervé; Hugo, Wim; Jenkyns, Reyna; Khodiyar, Varsha; Martone, Maryann E.; Mokrane, Mustapha; Navale, Vivek; Petters, Jonathan (2020-05-14). "The TRUST Principles for digital repositories". Scientific Data. 7 (1): 144. Bibcode:2020NatSD...7..144L. doi:10.1038/s41597-020-0486-7. ISSN 2052-4463. PMC 7224370. PMID 32409645.
  3. ^ Lin, Dawei; McAuliffe, Matthew; Pruitt, Kim D.; Gururaj, Anupama; Melchior, Christine; Schmitt, Charles; Wright, Susan N. (2024-06-13). "Biomedical Data Repository Concepts and Management Principles". Scientific Data. 11 (1): 622. Bibcode:2024NatSD..11..622L. doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03449-z. ISSN 2052-4463. PMC 11176378. PMID 38871749.
  4. ^ Platt, J; Douville, S; Mongoven, A (2022-05-31), Hudson, Florence D. (ed.), "How Can We Trust in IoT? The Role of Engineers in Ensuring Trust in the Clinical IoT Ecosystem", Women Securing the Future with TIPPSS for Connected Healthcare: Trust, Identity, Privacy, Protection, Safety, Security, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 83–113, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-93592-4_5, ISBN 978-3-030-93592-4, retrieved 2025-05-07
  5. ^ Carrillo, E; Frigerio, C; Valenzuela, M.J.; Aquaro, A; Mauduit, J.C.; Steenmans, I; Paz Sandoval, M (March 6, 2022). "The Performance Gap of Policy Information Systems: A Knowledge Infrastructure Assessment Framework". Journal of Science Policy & Governance. Retrieved 2025-05-07.
  6. ^ Schmitt, C.P.; Stingone, J.A.; Rajasekar, A; Cui, Y; Du, X; Duncan, C; Heacock, M; Hu, H; Gonzalez, J.R.; Juarez, P.D.; Smirnov, A.I. (2023-11-14). "A roadmap to advance exposomics through federation of data". Exposome. 3 (1): osad010. doi:10.1093/exposome/osad010. ISSN 2635-2265. PMC 11391905. PMID 39267798.
  7. ^ Mc Cartney, A.M.; Head, M.A.; Tsosie, K.S.; Sterner, B.; Glass, J.R.; Paez, S.; Geary, J.; Hudson, M. (2023-04-03). "Indigenous peoples and local communities as partners in the sequencing of global eukaryotic biodiversity". npj Biodiversity. 2 (1): 8. Bibcode:2023npjBD...2....8M. doi:10.1038/s44185-023-00013-7. ISSN 2731-4243.
  8. ^ Virapongse, A; Gallagher, J; Tikoff, B (2024-03-28). "Insights on Sustainability of Earth Science Data Infrastructure Projects". Data Science Journal. 23 (1): 14. doi:10.5334/dsj-2024-014. ISSN 1683-1470.
  9. ^ Baraldi, A; Sapia, L.D.; Tiede, D; Sudmanns, M; Augustin, H.L.; Lang, S (2023-07-03). "Innovative Analysis Ready Data (ARD) product and process requirements, software system design, algorithms and implementation at the midstream as necessary-but-not-sufficient precondition of the downstream in a new notion of Space Economy 4.0 - Part 1: Problem background in Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)". Big Earth Data. 7 (3): 455–693. Bibcode:2023BED.....7..455B. doi:10.1080/20964471.2021.2017549. ISSN 2096-4471.
  10. ^ Pias, Marcelo; Bull, Lawrence; Brennan, Daniel S.; Girolami, Mark; Crowcroft, Jon (2025-01-22). "On the scaling of digital twins by aggregation". Data & Policy. 7: e9. doi:10.1017/dap.2024.86. ISSN 2632-3249.
  11. ^ Devine, Denise (2024-08-23). "Examining Dataset FAIR Compliance in the Research Data Management Lifecycle". Dissertations - ALL.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:TRUST_Principles&oldid=1290107145"