Friedrich Leis, University of Bremen

From 25 to 27 August 2025, the first DiscussDataLab, organized by the Discuss Data project, brought together a dozen early career researchers working on Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and Central Asia with renowned experts in data collection, processing and visualisation. Discuss Data is a collaboration between the Research Center for East European Studies at the University of Bremen and the State and University Library, Göttingen, funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG), (https://discuss-data.net). The event took place at the Research Centre for East European Studies (FSO) at the University of Bremen (Germany). The three-day workshop, titled “Challenges of Data Collection, Re-use, and Analysis: Public Opinion, Political Debates, and Protests in the Context of the Russo-Ukrainian War”, aimed to create a room for learning and exchange for scholars with a thematic focus on migration, social media, and protest data.

The initial session focused on “Data Basics”. FELIX HERRMANN (Bremen) and EDUARD KLEIN (Bremen) introduced DiscussData, an open platform for publishing, managing and discussing research data. It was highlighted that with the growing amount of data, research data management platforms such as DiscussData are becoming increasingly relevant for research. Built on the FAIR principles of findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability, DiscussData is a secure environment for storing and archiving research data, while ensuring availability to other researchers. Data owners retain licensing rights and can choose between different publishing modes (open access, restricted access, metadata only). The integrated comment function aims to keep discussions connected to the data itself, preventing loss of context. Open-access datasets published on DiscussData are also long-time archived at the DARIAH-DE and Zenodo repositories, increasing their visibility and reach. Each published dataset receives a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI), which ensures long-term findability and citability. DiscussData thus represents a “safe haven” for research data from an increasingly authoritarian region, combining secure research data management with qualitative discussions in one place.

NELE FUCHS (Bremen) followed with a presentation on the importance of Research Data Management (RDM). She explained the goals of RDM as well as fundamental terms such as “research data”, “Open Science” and the FAIR Principles. The advantages of good RDM practices were illustrated using the research data lifecycle, a framework that serves to examine RDM at different stages of the research process. Fuchs provided tips on planning a research design, documenting carefully, handling sensitive data, organising data, and distributing data. The presentation demonstrated how RDM can enhance the efficiency of scientific progress, ensure its quality, increase its visibility and facilitate collaboration.

In the second session, HELLA VON UNGER (Munich) began by introducing Ethics Review Practices via video chat. Utilising a hypothetical scenario of an interview context, in which the interviewee unexpectedly disclosed highly sensitive information, she emphasised the challenges associated with research ethics and made the following statement: “expect the unexpected”. In that statement, she highlighted the significance of ethical reflexivity, which means that researchers should be reflecting research as a social process with personal, institutional and societal consequences as well as the values and principles that guide the research process. She then contrasts this understanding of research ethics with “procedural ethics”, i.e. ethics reviews. Von Unger provided a comprehensive overview of the history of the debate, followed by a thorough exposition of the criticisms of "procedural ethics". These criticisms included legitimacy, bureaucratization and legalization problems. She then highlighted the situation in Germany, where data protection law, research ethics and guidelines on good scientific practice sometimes contradict each other. Following the Code of Ethics, she emphasised the importance of researchers' integrity and objectivity, as well as the multiple challenges concerning the protection of participants (risk assessment, informed consent, anonymisation). In conclusion, she proposes the implementation of ethical reflexivity in research practice, publications and methodology training. Furthermore, she advises researchers to engage with research ethics committees to clarify one's methods and field, thereby enabling the committee to enhance its performance.

In the second part of the second session, INNA VOLOSEVYCH (Kyiv) reported on her experiences as director of Info Sapiens focusing in particular on the ethical and safety challenges since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion. Info Sapiens is a Ukrainian research agency that specializes in conducting public opinion surveys, behavioral measurements and in analysing data from secondary sources, (https://www.sapiens.com.ua/en/index). She reported that international organisations are highly interested in surveys conducted by Info Sapiens in the occupied territories, particularly with regard to political issues. However, Info Sapiens is currently unable to conduct face-to-face interviews and is limited to telephone interviews on humanitarian issues. Political questions cannot be asked to protect respondents from Russian repression because telephone calls may be tapped. Volosevych stresses that this is also the reason why surveys conducted in occupied territories express support for official Russian narratives. She also notes that Russian is increasingly less likely to be cited as the main language in Ukraine (from 48 percent in February 2022 to 22 percent in March 2022; July 2025: 7 percent via telephone). The handling of sensitive questions was also addressed. Such questions are posed at the end of Info Sapiens surveys. Interviewers undergo psychological training in preparation for this process and they are continuously evaluated with regard to their stress levels. Should the levels in question be found to be overly elevated, the interviewers are rotated and assigned to topics of a less stressful nature.

The day was rounded off with the session “Protest, Political Culture, Identity - Ukrainian Interview Collection 2014-2025”. YANA LYSENKO (Bremen) and HEIKO PLEINES (Bremen) presented the research project “Comparing Protest Actions” funded by the Volkswagen Foundation (https://www.volkswagenstiftung.de/en) and the follow-up Data Re-use Project. Lysenko conducted 19 semi-structured in-depth interviews with residents of the "Donetsk People's Republic" regarding their perceptions of the war in Ukraine, as well as 34 semi-structured in-depth interviews with Ukrainian citizens concerning their perceptions of the full-scale Russian invasion. The total duration of the conducted interviews is 139 hours and 38 minutes. Lysenko reported on her experiences and lessons learned from conducting, transcribing and coding these interviews. A series of challenges she encountered during the course of the interviews, transcriptions and coding were presented and subsequently discussed in depth, with particular attention being paid to the solutions she developed to overcome these difficulties. Similar to Volosevych, Lysenko also noted that conducting this type of field research is psychologically very demanding and that one must be prepared for participants with strong emotional reactions.

On the second day, breakout sessions were held, during which participants were divided into small groups in order to address their specific questions and provide feedback on the data they work on. The first breakout sessions focused on methods of data collection and analysis: Participants had the choice between sessions on Mixed Methods, moderated by JAN MATTI DOLLBAUM (Fribourg) and SVETA ERPYLEVA (Bremen), Interview Anonymisation, moderated by MONIKA LEICHTLING and VIOLA LOGEMANN (both Bremen) and Social Media & Content Analysis, moderated by MIGLĖ BAREIKYTĖ (Frankfurt (Oder)).

The second block of breakout sessions were on the topics of the participant’s data: Migration by EKATERINA VOROBEVA (Bremen), Social Media by Miglė Bareikytė and Protests by Jan Matti Dollbaum and Sveta Erpyleva.

Felix Herrmann and Eduard Klein led the first practical workshop session. During this session, they introduced the advantages of data publishing with Discuss Data, including increased visibility and improved data quality resulting from immediate feedback from the curators. Then, a comprehensive explanation of the publishing process was provided, along with guidance on the accurate documentation of data. Furthermore, guidance was provided on the matter of data publication during wartime circumstances. Herrmann and Klein placed particular emphasis on the significance of anonymisation and pseudonymisation in this context, highlighting the potential risks involved in compromising both the security of individuals and the security of the information itself.

Finally, the DiscussData curators, Jan Matti Dollbaum and Heiko Pleines, provided some useful tips and tricks for publishing data with Discuss Data.

The third and last day began with a second practical workshop session, where participants had the opportunity to get hands-on experience under the guidance of Felix Herrmann and Eduard Klein in order to prepare the upload of their own data sets to DiscussData.

Data Visualization was the last topic on the workshop's agenda. In that session SLAVA ROMANOV (Bremen) presented his EDIT WARS project (https://editwars.org/), where he and his team tried “to deconstruct, debunk and artistically interpret the narratives of Russian propaganda for raising awareness and resilience against misinformation among international audiences”. He explained why they opted for certain design decisions and provided an insight into the exhibition "PROPAGANDA NARRATIVE SOUNDSCAPES". A particular highlight was the interactive dashboard that Romanov had set up for the participants, which offered an impressive soundscape that interacted with diagrams about several Russian propaganda narratives. Finally, he addressed ethical concerns, such as avoiding the mass reproduction of original propaganda material.

MORITZ STEFANER (Lilienthal), an independent data visualisation expert (Truth & Beauty, https://truth-and-beauty.net/), who worked among others for the German Foreign Office, WHO and OECD, gave the final presentation of the workshop. He introduced data visualisation as a medium that can be used in multiple ways. He stated that data visualisation is not only for making charts look better. The aim of data visualisation is to create a mixed-media information product that presents data in a way that is legible, actionable, tangible, graspable, digestible, memorable, emotional, meaningful and truthful.

The first DiscussDataLab provided a productive environment for exchange, reflection and methodological development. The combination of conceptual input sessions, hands-on workshops and open discussion formats proved valuable, although some sessions were at an introductory level and could therefore seem somewhat repetitive for some participants. The collegial atmosphere encouraged critical debate and constructive feedback, thus facilitating a productive exchange of experiences during meetings and breaks.

The workshop demonstrated how essential robust research data management and ethical awareness have become for contemporary research, especially in politically sensitive and conflict-affected areas. It has been demonstrated that the latter requires specific methodological and ethical strategies that demand flexible, reflexive, and context-sensitive approaches. In conclusion, DiscussDataLab showed how thoughtful research data management and ethical reflexivity can work together to enhance research quality, transparency and collaboration.

Conference overview

Input Session 1: Data Basics

Felix Herrmann (Bremen) / Eduard Klein (Bremen): Introduction to Discuss Data

Nele Fuchs (Bremen): Why RDM & FAIR Data Matters

Input Session 2: Research Ethics

Hella von Unger (Munich): Ethics Review Practices

Inna Volosevych (Kyiv): The Ethics of War Research: Ukraine

Yana Lysenko (Bremen) / Heiko Pleines (Bremen): Protest, Political Culture, Identity - Ukrainian Interview Collection 2014-2025

Breakout Session 1: Methods

Jan Matti Dollbaum (Fribourg) / Sveta Erpyleva (Bremen): Mixed methods

Monika Leichtling (Bremen) / Viola Logemann (Bremen): Interview Anonymisation

Miglė Bareikytė (Frankfurt (Oder)): Social Media & content analysis

Breakout Session 2: Categories

Ekaterina Vorobeva (Bremen): Migration

Miglė Bareikytė (Frankfurt (Oder)): Social media

Jan Matti Dollbaum (Fribourg) / Sveta Erpyleva (Bremen): Protests

Workshop Session 1: Preparing your Data For Publication / Data Documentation
Felix Herrmann (Bremen) / Eduard Klein (Bremen)

Jan Matti Dollbaum (Fribourg) / Heiko Pleines (Bremen): Curators Tips & Tricks for Data Publication

Workshop Session 2: Data Upload
Felix Herrmann (Bremen) / Eduard Klein (Bremen)

Input Session 3: Data Visualization

Slava Romanov (Bremen): Deconstructing Russian propaganda

Moritz Stefaner (Lilienthal): Tips & Tricks for data visualization

 

The report has been published first in H-Soz-Kult: Friedrich Leis, Tagungsbericht: Challenges of Data Collection, Re-use, and Analysis, in: H-Soz-Kult, 05.03.2026, https://www.hsozkult.de/conferencereport/id/fdkn-160778.

We thank the author and H-Soz-Kult for reusage.