Étiquette : ORCID

Catégories
EN

Evolution of the Involvement of Researchers From the University of Caen (France) in Author Identifiers and Social Networks: 2019–2023

Authors : Sarah Marcq, Aline Bouchard, Isabelle Mauger Perez, Benjamin Bober, Christophe Boudry

As author identifier services (AIDs) and academic social networks (ASNs) have become increasingly central to scholarly communication in the last decade, it is important to study how these tools are being used and how far researchers are involved in these services.

This study aims to assess the evolution of the presence of researchers from 2019 to 2023, on three AIDs (ORCID, ResearcherID and IdHAL) and on two ASNs (ResearchGate and Academia) categorized by discipline and career advancement in a medium-sized multidisciplinary university in France (University of Caen Normandy).

The total number of publications found on each of the five sites studied was assessed to evaluate the ability of these sites to provide an accurate view of the scientific output of individuals and their institution.

In this case, for each of the researchers we need to determine whether they had a profile on any website studied, and to record the number of their publications. As main results, the number of profiles has increased across the five sites studied over the period 2019–2023.

This increase is very important on two of the five sites studied: IdHAL and ORCID (330% and 159% increase, respectively), while it is more moderate on the other three sites (less than 30%). This illustrates the result of incentive policies implemented in France in recent years concerning IdHAL and ORCID.

The analysis of the number of publications on each profile in 2019 and 2023 across the five sites studied showed large differences in terms of the total number of publications included in profiles, highlighting the inability of these sites to qualify a population of researchers by considering the number of publications available on these different sites.

To complement this study, future research should consider analysing the content and methods of data entry on these sites, particularly ORCID, as well as the frequency with which this data is updated, especially in relation to the development of different providers in the context of open science.

URL : Evolution of the Involvement of Researchers From the University of Caen (France) in Author Identifiers and Social Networks: 2019–2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2101

Catégories
EN

Understanding ORCID adoption among academic researchers

Author : Stephen R. Porter

Just over a decade ago, the ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier) was created to provide a unique digital identifier for researchers around the world. The ORCID has proven essential in identifying individual researchers and their publications, both for bibliometric research analyses and for universities and other organizations tracking the research productivity and impact of their personnel.

Yet widespread adoption of the ORCID by individual researchers has proved elusive, with previous studies finding adoption rates ranging from 3% to 42%. Using a national survey of U.S. academic researchers at 31 research universities, we investigate why some researchers adopt an ORCID and some do not. We found an overall adoption rate of 72%, with adoptions rates ranging between academic disciplines from a low of 17% in the visual and performing arts to a high of 93% in biological and biomedical sciences.

Many academic journals require an ORCID to submit a manuscript, and this is the main reason why researchers adopt an ORCID. The top three reasons for not having an ORCID are not seeing the benefits, being far enough in the academic career to not need it, and working in an academic discipline where it is not needed.

URL : Understanding ORCID adoption among academic researchers

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-025-05300-7

Catégories
EN

Adoption and use of author identifier services: A French national survey

Authors : Christophe Boudry, Aline Bouchard

This paper studies awareness and use of author identifier services (AIDs) in the French academic community and explores needs and forms of support required for these tools, using a national questionnaire survey. ArXivID, IdHAL, ORCID, ResearcherID and Scopus Author ID were investigated. A total of 6125 people completed the questionnaire in full. The results of this survey show that discipline and age play an important role in French researchers’ familiarity with AIDs.

IdHAL and ORCID were by far the two best known AIDs, probably because they have been promoted by institutions in France for several years. French researchers use AIDs mainly to respond to external requests (e.g., to submit an article or a research project), while, surprisingly, few use them to ‘facilitate their work’.

When French researchers were asked about their needs and the form of support required for AIDs, more than 30% of them said they either required an introduction to or practical training in these tools. The results of this national survey should help stakeholders to adapt their policies and to guide and support researchers more efficiently in the use of these tools.

URL : Adoption and use of author identifier services: A French national survey

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1640

Catégories
FR

Utilisation et usages des identifiants numériques chercheurs en France. Synthèse de l’enquête nationale 2023

Auteur.ices/Authors : Aline Bouchard, Christophe Boudry

L’enquête présentée dans ce rapport s’insère dans un projet de recherche composé de quatre phases qualitatives et quantitatives, dont les résultats seront publiés au fur et à mesure de l’avancement du projet. Le présent rapport en constitue la première partie et présente les résultats d’un questionnaire national, conduit entre novembre 2022 et février 2023.

Son objectif principal était de faire un état des lieux des usages des identifiants numériques chercheurs (INC), et plus particulièrement d’ORCID, dans la communauté de recherche française, en étudiant leur contexte, leur connaissance et leurs pratiques associées, les moteurs et freins à leur adoption, et les besoins de formation à ces outils. 6 125 personnes ont complété intégralement ce questionnaire national, ce qui correspond à environ 3,2 % de la population nationale des chercheurs.

La première partie de ce rapport questionne les répondants sur leur familiarité et leurs connaissances des réseaux sociaux académiques (RSA), outils de visibilité et identifiants numériques chercheurs. Cette partie met en évidence le rôle essentiel de la discipline dans l’appropriation de ces différents outils, de grandes catégories d’usages et différents degrés d’acculturation à ces outils.

La deuxième partie de ce rapport concerne spécifiquement l’INC ORCID, et montre globalement une connaissance et une utilisation avant tout concrète et pragmatique de cet identifiant par les chercheurs. Concernant les besoins en formation ou initiation à ces outils, selon les chercheurs interrogés, ils s’avèrent être encore importants, que ce soit en présentiel ou en distanciel.

URL : Utilisation et usages des identifiants numériques chercheurs en France. Synthèse de l’enquête nationale 2023

HAL : https://hal.science/hal-04537803

Catégories
EN

ORCID coverage in research institutions—Readiness for partially automated research reporting

Authors : Kathrin Schnieders, Sandra Mierz, Sabine Boccalini, Wibke Meyer zu Westerhausen, Christian Hauschke, Stephanie Hagemann-Wilholt, Sonja Schulze

Reporting and presentation of research activities and outcome for research institutions in official, normative standards are more and more important and are the basis to comply with reporting duties. Institutional Current Research Information Systems (CRIS) serve as important databases or data sources for external and internal reporting, which should ideally be connected with interfaces to the operational systems for automated loading routines to extract relevant research information.

This investigation evaluates whether (semi-) automated reporting using open, public research information collected via persistent identifiers (PIDs) for organizations (ROR), persons (ORCID), and research outputs (DOI) can reduce effort of reporting.

For this purpose, internally maintained lists of persons to whom an ORCID record could be assigned (internal ORCID person lists) of two different German research institutions—Osnabrück University (UOS) and the non-university research institution TIB—Leibniz Information Center for Science and Technology Hannover—are used to investigate ORCID coverage in external open data sources like FREYA PID Graph (developed by DataCite), OpenAlex and ORCID itself. Additionally, for UOS a detailed analysis of discipline specific ORCID coverage is conducted. Substantial differences can be found for ORCID coverage between both institutions and for each institution regarding the various external data sources.

A more detailed analysis of ORCID distribution by discipline for UOS reveals disparities by research area—internally and in external data sources. Recommendations for future actions can be derived from our results: Although the current level of coverage of researcher IDs which could automatically be mapped is still not sufficient to use persistent identifier-based extraction for standard (automated) reporting, it can already be a valuable input for institutional CRIS.

URL : ORCID coverage in research institutions—Readiness for partially automated research reporting

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2022.1010504

Catégories
EN

ORCID growth and field-wise dynamics of adoption: A case study of the Toulouse scientific area

Authors : Marie-Dominique Heusse, Guillaume Cabanac

Research-focused information systems harvest and promote the scientific output of researchers. Disambiguating author identities is key when disentangling homonyms to avoid merging several persons’ records.

ORCID offers an identifier to link one’s identity, affiliations and bibliography. While funding agencies and scholarly publishers promote ORCID, little is known about its adoption rate. We introduce a method to quantify ORCID adoption according to researchers’ discipline and occupation in a higher-education organization.

We semi-automatically matched the 6,607 staff members affiliated to the 145 labs of the Toulouse scientific area with the 7.3 million profiles at orcid.org. The observed ORCID adoption of 41.8% comes with discipline-wise disparities. Unexpectedly, only 48.3% of all profiles listed at least one work and profiles with no works might just have been created to get an identifier.

Those ‘empty’ profiles are of little interest for the entity disambiguation task. To our knowledge, this is the first study of ORCID adoption at the scale of a multidisciplinary scientific metropole. This method is replicable and future studies can target other cases to contrast the dynamics of ORCID adoption worldwide.

URL : ORCID growth and field-wise dynamics of adoption: A case study of the Toulouse scientific area

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1451

Catégories
EN

Two-dimensional books for the new Open Access academic publishing

Author : Fulvio Guatelli

Metadata have become a key element of scientific communication. Indeed, the content of a publication – that is, what we love, discuss and judge – is no longer the alpha and omega of a scientific publication nor its exclusive centre of gravity. Books are gradually taking the form of an iceberg, whose visible part is represented by the content, while the submerged part is constituted by metadata.

In the current communication approach of scientific research, metadata and dissemination go hand in hand, as metadata provide a huge contribution to the success of the research itself.

In this paper, I will illustrate how – in the field of today’s scholarly publishing – best practices, simple metadata, and cataloguing indicators such as DOI and ORCID are taking on the task that was once accomplished by chariots pulled by sturdy horses coming out of Aldo Manuzio’s workshop: spreading books and the discoveries of scientific research all over the world.

URL : Two-dimensional books for the new Open Access academic publishing

Original location : https://jlis.fupress.net/index.php/jlis/article/view/425