Yes, it is completely fine. The hardest issue foraresearcher is to find data. So, if we receive access to the sample, we try to put more questions and combine studies. So, as long as you use different sets of variables and do not propose any conflicting theory, if is acceptable. 

The only issue you might face, is that due to, for example,e, too many questions, you participants might have become tired and the last answers are biased. Just make a Common Method Bias test.

Best,

Eugene 

Thank you so much for your swift answer. 

I'll start writing another now with different sets of variables.

As you mentioned it would have been tedious for some (I hope not many...) participants who took a long time to complete the questionnaire. 

Sincerely,

Reina

There are a lot of public use datasets that are available so that many researchers can use the same data. Often databases are too rich to be fully reported on in a single article, and sometimes data that have already been reported on deserve a second look, examining the data in a new way. So, yes, keep working with the data.

Since it takes time to write up a paper, if the study can be written as a single coherent paper that is better for the authors (i.e., less work, less having to go through the revise cycles of journals) and it is also better for the audience if it is likely that reading one of the papers would lead the person to want to read the other. That said, often it takes time to do the analyses and you write up the first one before beginning analyses on the second, so it would not be practical to wait.

You can, especially when the use of the new variables (or combination of the new variables to the already used ones) yield different or provide more comprehensive interpretation of the data. 

Yes of course 

It's a good think for you if you can be Smart and if you can have two papers with one data base ;)

Good Luck 

In fact, it was the first time I posted a Q here. I was surprised at first and then amazed to have many answers. 

It's very encouraging to be a part of this community...as life as a grad student can be stressful sometimes.

I appreciate your time and helpful comments. Thank you. 

Dear Reina

True, you can not only produce two rather as many as you can produce some meaningful information for the scientific community and public. Infact, we collect data and use for one issue and keep the data in safe boxes. This is basically not only loss of resources rather depriving or delaying the information to the world. 

I feel and tested also, once you complete data collection, your horizon became broad and you may get new ideas. I wish and suggest that we researchers produces as much information as possible rather we must also collaborate other data gathers to get further information. 

One can use different approaches and methods to get the response.

Best wishes.

Regards

Dear Reina & All,

Obviously one could publish "as many as possible" articles using the same data  but with different variables. BUT, I am interested really in knowing whether there is an ethical concern about this or no. Frankly, I don not know but I would not do it.

In "open letter to authors" published by APA appears the following:

"Duplicate/fragmented publication. Duplicate publication involves publishing the same data more than once. Fragmented (or piecemeal) publication involves dividing the report of a research project into multiple articles. Duplicate or fragmented publications are misleading if they appear to represent independent instances. They can distort the scientific literature, especially in reviews or metaanalyses". for more information find full letter text on https://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/openletter.pdf

Thanks for all 

It's not at all uncommon for several investigators to be involved in a large-scale field study, where each of them may have some specific interests that aren't necessarily shared by everyone. And it's pretty common to have large survey projects where several doctoral students might work together under the supervision of one or more senior investigators, where each student takes part of the data for use in their own dissertation. I worked on several such projects at the RAND Corporation. The important part is to be sure that all products of the study reflect each other in cross-references, so that co-dependence of findings can be detected if the data are being used, as one other respondent mentioned, for common purposes like meta-analysis.

I've just talked to one of my fellow students the other day about this issue. I was happy to have further, thoughtful answers.

Dear Al-hamouri,

This is a good and considerate point. Thank you for sharing the resource. I'll consider those issues before writing discussions. 

Dear Eveland,

Thank you for sharing your experience of working on large-scale projects. Now I'll be wary of using data collected by a large-scale project.

I recently got a comment from a journal reviewer suggesting that I split my manuscript into 2 or 3 articles.