Sharing and archiving data is fundamental to scientific progress.

The persuasive argument for sharing and archiving data is that scientists must build on the shoulders of other scientists, that science is cumulative and replicative, and that science must be open. Sharing and archiving data are just a small part of all that is implied by that principle, but it is inextricably part of our obligation as social and behavioral scientists to conduct our work in the open. Only then can others see and understand what we did, and only then will someone have a chance to confirm that we were right, or to prove that we were wrong. Moreover, data archiving and sharing create opportunities for addressing questions not envisioned by the initial investigators. Indeed, by supplementing or pooling archived data, new and original data sets can be created that permit analyses well beyond the purpose or scope of the initial data collection. Of course, the creativity and labor of initial investigators should be protected, and the privacy of research participants must be safeguarded. These protections and safeguards, however, are not antithetical to data archiving and sharing. They simply raise questions about when and how data archiving and sharing should take place. In our view, the benefits of properly archived and shared data for outweigh the potential for harm. As indicated above, this is a perspective shared by several funding agencies of behavioral and social research, including the NIA.