This special section stems from discussions that took place in a forum at the Society for American Archaeology's annual conference in 2017. The forum, Beyond Data Management: A Conversation about “Digital Data Realities”, addressed challenges in fostering greater reuse of the digital archaeological data now curated in repositories. Forum discussants considered digital archaeology beyond the status quo of “data management” to better situate the sharing and reuse of data in archaeological practice. The five papers for this special section address key themes that emerged from these discussions, including: challenges in broadening data literacy by making instructional uses of data; strategies to make data more visible, better cited, and more integral to peer-review processes; and pathways to create higher-quality data better suited for reuse. These papers highlight how research data management needs to move beyond mere “check-box” compliance for granting requirements. The problems and proposed solutions articulated by these papers help communicate good practices that can jumpstart a virtuous cycle of better data creation leading to higher impact reuses of data.

Preservation of digital data is predicated on the expectation of its reuse, yet that expectation has never been examined within archaeology. While we have extensive digital archives equipped to share data, evidence of reuse seems paradoxically limited. Most archaeological discussions have focused on data management and preservation and on disciplinary practices surrounding archiving and sharing data. This article addresses the reuse side of the data equation through a series of linked questions: What is the evidence for reuse, what constitutes reuse, what are the motivations for reuse, and what makes some data more suitable for reuse than others? It concludes by posing a series of questions aimed at better understanding our digital engagement with archaeological data.

This article presents research on archaeological data creation and management practices at two excavations in Europe in order to gain a better understanding of how to align these practices with the data reuse needs of a broader research community. The Secret Life of Data project follows the life cycle of data from the field to the digital repository to better understand opportunities and challenges in data interpretation, publication, and preservation. Our “Slow Data” approach focuses not on maximizing the speed and quantity of data but, rather, on emphasizing curation, contextualization, communication, and broader understanding. Through a mixed-methods approach of interviews, field observations, and excavation data assessments, we recommended changes (both technical and organizational) to improve data creation and management practices. We report our findings and offer readers guidance on streamlining data collection for reuse during excavation.

The ease of digital data capture and the proliferation of concepts such as the “data deluge” suggest that modern researchers are drowning in datasets. Yet citations of archaeological datasets are few and far between, pointing to low rates of data reuse. This article explores the difficulties that surround data reuse in large-scale regional research, including the cost and coordination necessary to extract useful data from digitized PDF reports. The amount of correction and enhancement matches the effort needed to undertake a small field survey project and can only be circumvented with a thoughtful application of computer-assisted text analysis. Missing data in excavation report PDFs are not only intractable but also insidious due to their concealed nature, leading to poor outcomes in terms of (re)use. Consequently, the degree of data reuse in archaeology has been overestimated.

How do archaeologists share their research data, if at all? We review what data are, according to current influential definitions, and previous work on the benefits, costs, and norms of data sharing in the sciences broadly. To understand data sharing in archaeology, we present the results of three pilot studies: requests for data by e-mail, review of data availability in published articles, and analysis of archaeological datasets deposited in repositories. We find that archaeologists are often willing to share but that discipline-wide sharing is patchy and ad hoc. Legislation and mandates are effective at increasing data sharing, but editorial policies at journals lack adequate enforcement. Although most of the data available at repositories are licensed to enable flexible reuse, only a small proportion of the data are stored in structured formats for easy reuse. We present some suggestions for improving the state of date sharing in archaeology; among these is a standard for citing datasets to ensure that researchers making their data publicly available receive appropriate credit.

Digital literacy has been cited as one of the primary challenges to ensuring data reuse and increasing the value placed on open science. Incorporating published data into classrooms and training is at the core of tackling this issue. This article presents case studies in teaching with different published data platforms, in three different countries (the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States), to students at different levels and with differing skill levels. In outlining their approaches, successes, and failures in teaching with open data, it is argued that collaboration with data publishers is critical to improving data reuse and education. Moreover, increased opportunities for digital skills training and scaffolding across program curriculum are necessary for managing the learning curve and teaching students the values of open science.

In 1979, Edward C. Harris invented and published his eponymous matrix for visualizing stratigraphy, creating an indispensable tool for generations of archaeologists. When presenting his matrix, Harris also detailed his four laws of archaeological stratigraphy: superposition, original horizontal, original continuity, and stratigraphic succession. In 2017, I created the first stratigraphic matrix for software, using as a test the 2016 video game No Man's Sky (Hello Games). Software (games or otherwise) obeys all four of Harris's laws, software applications/programs themselves being digital archaeological sites. I study the archaeology of the recent past, which includes digital technology, specifically that which is ephemeral: software. This article describes my underlying theory of software stratigraphy and explains how (and why) the Harris matrix is appropriate for documenting software development in a visual way. The article includes my complete data set as well as screen captures, plus overall and detail photos of my hand-drawn software matrix prototype, followed by a bullet-pointed how-to guide for others to use when documenting the history of any computer program. I also include Harris's personal comments that he shared with me after reviewing my preliminary results.

In early 2017, Sarah Parcak used her $1 million TED Prize to build the GlobalXplorer° platform (https://www.globalxplorer.org) “to identify and quantify looting and encroachment to sites of archaeological and historical importance,” using a crowdsourced “citizen science” methodology popularized by the Zooniverse web portal. GlobalXplorer° invited the public to search satellite imagery from Peru for evidence of looting within 100 m × 100 m squares, training them along the way and gamifying participation. In this review, I test the platform and consider the applicability of GlobalXplorer° as a vector for changing the way that the general public perceives the global illicit trade in cultural objects.

In the original publication of this article, the middle initial of the second author was incorrect. The authors apologize for this error. The original article has since been corrected.