Abstract: The role played by research scholars in the dissemination of scientific knowledge on social media has always been a central topic in social media metrics (altmetrics) research. Different approaches have been implemented to identify and characterize active scholars on social media platforms like Twitter. Some limitations of past approaches were their complexity and, most importantly, their reliance on licensed scientometric and altmetric data. The emergence of new open data sources like OpenAlex or Crossref Event Data provides opportunities to identify scholars on social media using only open data. This paper presents a novel and simple approach to match authors from OpenAlex with Twitter users identified in Crossref Event Data. The matching procedure is described and validated with ORCID data. The new approach matches nearly 500,000 matched scholars with their Twitter accounts with a level of high precision and moderate recall. The dataset of matched scholars is described and made openly available to the scientific community to empower more advanced studies of the interactions of research scholars on Twitter.
“As open research in Kenya grows in popularity—especially in the areas of higher education and academia—ORCID adoption has increased as well. ORCID Membership in Kenya represents a diverse group of constituents, including PAMJ in publishing, Strathmore University in higher education, The African Academy of Sciences in funding, and the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) as a key supporter of open research.
In order to ensure quality in the science, technology, and innovation sector, every researcher must obtain a government license to conduct research in Kenya. To support this requirement, NACOSTI provides research licensing, registration of research institutions in Kenya, and accreditation of research institutions….”
“Crossref, DataCite and ORCID work together to provide foundational open infrastructure that is integral to the global research ecosystem. We offer unique, persistent identifiers (PIDs) — Crossref and DataCite DOIs for research outputs and ORCID iDs for people — alongside collecting comprehensive, open metadata that is non-proprietary, accessible, interoperable, and available across borders, disciplines, and time.
As sustainable community-driven scholarly infrastructure providers ORCID, Crossref and Datacite, guarantee data provenance and machine-readability. Persistent identifiers combined with open, standardized, and machine readable metadata enable reliable and robust connections to be made between research outputs, organizations, individuals and much more, as well as being beneficial to others who build services and tools on top of the open infrastructure we provide making content more discoverable.
Join us for a webinar on the 27th June at 7am UTC/ 9am CEST / 5pm AEST where we will discuss:
– Who we are
– What we mean by Open Scholarly Infrastructure
– How our organizations work together for the benefit of the scholarly community
– How the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) help to build trust and accountability as well as ensuring we are around for the long term….”
“Online accounts to keep track of scientific publications, such as Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) or Google Scholar, can be time consuming to maintain and synchronize. Furthermore, the open access status of publications is often not easily accessible, hindering potential opening of closed publications. To lessen the burden of managing personal profiles, we developed a R shiny app that allows publication lists from multiple platforms to be retrieved and consolidated, as well as interactive exploration and comparison of publication profiles. A live version can be found at pubassistant.ch.
“We are excited to announce the first of a series of planned collaborations between ORCID and the OA Switchboard with the launch of ORCID-enabled smart matching in OA Switchboard. With their April 2022 release, OA Switchboard users will be able to leverage authoritative affiliation data from authors’ ORCID profiles to corroborate affiliation or organizational identifiers (such as ROR or Ringgold IDs) and ensure more accurate routing of the messages being shared between participants throughout the Open Access (OA) research cycle and publication journey, ultimately resulting in more complete and better quality metadata in the OA Switchboard messages for each article published. …”
“Over the past 10 years, stakeholders across the scholarly communications community have invested significantly not only to increase the adoption of ORCID adoption by researchers, but also to build the broader infrastructures that are needed both to support ORCID and to benefit from it. These parallel efforts have fostered the emergence of a “research information citizenry” between researchers, publishers, funders, and institutions. This paper takes a scientometric approach to investigating how effectively ORCID roles and responsibilities within this citizenry have been adopted. Focusing specifically on researchers, publishers, and funders, ORCID behaviors are measured against the approximated research world represented by the Dimensions dataset….”
“Whilst most journal websites only give the names of the editors, others possibly add a country, some include affiliations, very few link to a professional profile, an ORCID ID. Even when it’s clear when the editorial board details were updated, it’s hardly ever possible to find past editorial boards information and almost none lists declarations of competing interest.
We hear of instances where a researcher’s name has been listed on the board of a journal without their knowledge or agreement, potentially to deceive other researchers into submitting their manuscripts. Regular reports of impersonation, nepotism, collusion and conflicts of interest have become a cause for concern.
Similarly, recent studies on gender representation and gender and geographical disparity on editorial boards have highlighted the need to do better in this area and provide trusted, reliable and coherent information on editorial board members in order to add transparency, prevent unethical behaviour, maintain trust, promote and support research integrity….
We are proposing the creation of some form of Registry of Editorial Boards to encourage best practice around editorial boards’ information and governance that can easily be accessed and used by the community….”
ORCID is seeking an experienced and enthusiastic professional for the position of Content Marketing Writer. If you like the flexibility of a remote organization and the public-service orientation of a non-profit, join us on our mission to connect research and researchers!
To Apply: Please submit your application through this portal, including a resume and cover letter. In your cover letter, please tell us the name of your favorite plant and why. ORCID encourages applicants who meet some, but not all of the requirements and qualifications, to apply.
ORCID is seeking a Content Marketing Writer to create and manage the distribution of well-researched, original content for our blog, website, social media accounts, and other channels to promote awareness of and engagement with ORCID. We are looking for someone who has a knack for translating complex technical information into compelling, substantive, jargon-free content that informs and inspires. If you are familiar with the research and scholarly communication ecosystem that’s a bonus! We are a fully remote company and the successful candidate will possess the technical and communications skills required to collaborate with a multi-cultural, globally distributed team. If you like to foster teamwork and genuine collaboration, are self-motivated, organized, dedicated, and enjoy the mission-driven environment of a fast-paced maturing non-profit organization, this could be the job for you.
The position reports to the Director of Communications and will be part of the Communications team. Our ideal candidate will be able to develop and manage compelling, effective content; forge productive collaborations with internal and external partners; and will thrive in an environment of continual learning and improvement.
Develop and manage compelling, effective content
Oversee the content development life cycle: ideation, research, drafting, editing, managing editorial calendars, distribution, promotion, and engagement analysis of blog posts, web content, copy for social media campaigns, video scripts, and copy for infographic or other training or outreach material such as slide decks.
Develop high-quality content that is compelling, substantive, and jargon-free for audiences that have varying degrees of technical expertise.
Develop innovative content strategies that leverage your expertise in writing marketing content to support ORCID goals and priorities, that aligns with ORCID values, and incorporates established branding, messaging, and voice.
Forge productive collaborations
Build professional and trusting working relationships with teammates and external stakeholders to help strengthen the momentum of Comms team initiatives and support overall ORCID goals and priorities.
Coordinate with internal and external subject matter experts (SMEs) as necessary to develop collaborative content such as interviews or success stories with community members or ORCID users.
Brainstorm with team members and external partners and community stakeholders to develop creative, effective, and timely content.
Cultivate continual improvement
Analyze performance indicators for blog and social media accounts to determine the effectiveness of created content towards realizing ORCID goals and priorities. This requires knowledge of and/or willingness to learn about SEO best practices for digital and online content.
Conduct needs analyses or interview internal customers to ensure stakeholder requirements are being met.
Update legacy content to align with and include new value stories for all our stakeholder groups.
Requirements and Qualifications
Minimum 2 years of experience in technical or science-related writing positions
Ability to work on multiple projects with different objectives simultaneously and juggle varied workstreams
Ability to research industry topics to generate content for a variety of stakeholder groups
Excellent self-editing/proofreading capability
Ability to work under tight deadlines and prioritize responsibilities with an understanding that priorities may change quickly
Ability to learn new concepts and skills quickly
Strong organizational skills
Scholarly comms background a big plus but not required
Experience working and engaging in global, multicultural, and virtual team environments
Excellent communication, presentation, and collaboration skills
Strong attention to detail and the ability to handle multiple demands and shifting priorities in a fast-paced environment
“An ambitious free index of more than 200 million scientific documents that catalogues publication sources, author information and research topics, has been launched.
The index, called OpenAlex after the ancient Library of Alexandria in Egypt, also aims to chart connections between these data points to create a comprehensive, interlinked database of the global research system, say its founders. The database, which launched on 3 January, is a replacement for Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG), a free alternative to subscription-based platforms such as Scopus, Dimensions and Web of Science that was discontinued at the end of 2021.
“It’s just pulling lots of databases together in a clever way,” says Euan Adie, founder of Overton, a London-based firm that tracks the research cited in policy documents. Overton had been getting its data from various sources, including MAG, ORCID, Crossref and directly from publishers, but has now switched to using only OpenAlex, in the hope of making the process easier….”
Abstract: This chapter presents a three-phase analysis of 521 journals that use the open source publishing platform Open Journal Systems (OJS) while appearing on Beall’s list of predatory publishers and journals and/or inCabells Predatory Reports, both which purport to identify journals that charge authors article processing fees (APC) to publish in the pretense of a peer-reviewed journal. In 2020, 25,671 journals were actively using OJS, with 81.3 percent in the Global South, representing a great growth in global research activities. As members of the Public Knowledge Project, which develops this freely available publishing platform, the authors feel a responsibility to explore what platform developers can do to address both the real problem of duplicitous journals and the over-ascription of the “predatory” label to publishers and journals. represented by the authors of this chapter, Drawing on data from the beacon is a part of OJS, the chapter represents an assessment and intervention In the first phase, the researchers reached out to 50 publishers and 51 journals that use OJS and appear on Beall’s list offering to assist in improving their journal quality. The response from 14 publishers (28.0 percent) among publishers and two journals (3.9 percent) among standalone journals demonstrated a likely misanalysis as “predatory” along multiple dimensions from financial model to peer-review evidence. The second phase, devoted to assessing the degree to which journals using OJS are implicated in this issue, revealed that 2.0 percent of the journals using OJS are on one or both lists. The two phases point to how the identification issue is not that of Beall or Cabells International, but results from a journal tradition of asking readers to take on trust the adherence to scholarly standards. Amid the increase in research and open access to it, the third phase of this study introduces PKP’s new technical strategy for verifying and communicating standards adherence to the public. Work has begun on systems involving trade organizations, such ORCiD and Crossref, for authenticating journal practices (including editorial oversight, peer review, research funding, and data management), while communication strategies include adapting and testing with students and professionals the familiar Nutrition Facts label used with packaged foods. The goal is to provide a publicly accessible industry standard for more reliably assessing journal quality.
Abstract: Since 2012, the “Open Researcher and Contributor ID” organisation (ORCID) has been successfully running a worldwide registry, with the aim of “providing a unique, persistent identifier for individuals to use as they engage in research, scholarship, and innovation activities”. Any service in the scholarly communication ecosystem (e.g., publishers, repositories, CRIS systems, etc.) can contribute to a non-ambiguous scholarly record by including, during metadata deposition, referrals to iDs in the ORCID registry.
The OpenAIRE Research Graph is a scholarly knowledge graph that aggregates both records from the ORCID registry and publication records with ORCID referrals from publishers and repositories worldwide to yield research impact monitoring and Open Science statistics. Graph data analytics revealed “anomalies” due to ORCID registry “misapplications”, caused by wrong ORCID referrals and misexploitation of the ORCID registry. Albeit these affect just a minority of ORCID records, they inevitably affect the quality of the ORCID infrastructure and may fuel the rise of detractors and scepticism about the service.
In this paper, we classify and qualitatively document such misapplications, identifying five ORCID registrant-related and ORCID referral-related anomalies to raise awareness among ORCID users. We describe the current countermeasures taken by ORCID and, where applicable, provide recommendations. Finally, we elaborate on the importance of a community-steered Open Science infrastructure and the benefits this approach has brought and may bring to ORCID.
“Although final terms and conditions won’t be finalized until late 2021 for articles and 2022 for books, here are five things you ought to know:
1) Embargoes are out, immediate OA is in…
2) To Plan S, or not to Plan S? …
3) Monographs, finally! …
4) The uphill road to rights retention …
5) Let’s get technical …”
“Why: The ORCID permanent identifier is a powerful, widely adopted means of linking people unambiguously to their publications, projects, institutions and more, and distinguishing each researcher across the globe.
However, the full power of ORCID within the research infrastructure is only unleashed through ORCID-enabled systems. Different levels of integration are evident across different systems, and therefore there are different degrees of automation, intervention and verification to be aware of….”
“ORCID has introduced a number of improvements in 2021, including the Affiliation Manager, new Member Reporting, support for CRediT, the new “Funded by” relationship type, UI updates, and full translations in all 12 supported languages.
As we talk about in our newly published Strategic Plan, we have a lot of exciting updates on the horizon that will increase the value of the ORCID record to both researchers and members. Here’s a quick recap of what we shared last week in our September Product Interest Group meeting. …
ROR has now been added as a disambiguated ORG ID and can be used with the API and affiliation manager.
We are working with our community on the best way to stop the support of GRID and will be sharing more details soon (be sure you’re subscribed to blog updates to be notified). …”
“As noted at the start of this post, don’t be discouraged if you can’t add all of the above elements to your article-level metadata. Remember, any metadata enrichment step you take, no matter how big or small, will make a difference in your article discoverability. We recommend taking an iterative approach to metadata enrichment and, above all, focusing on quality over quantity. So be sure to first establish a means of producing clean JATS XML metadata and HTML meta tags for all of your articles and then begin layering on new metadata elements from there.
You don’t have to go the metadata enrichment journey alone either. Service providers can help you produce machine-readable metadata for all of your articles and enrich it. For example, Scholastica automatically generates machine-readable HTML and JATS XML metadata for all articles typeset by our digital-first production service, including automated citation metadata enrichment via machine learning. We also automatically produce machine-readable metadata for all articles published using our Open Access journal hosting platform. And when journals use Scholastica’s peer review management system, they can automatically apply metadata collected during peer review to articles submitted to our production service and/or published via Scholastica’s OA journal hosting platform to save even more time. You can learn more about how Scholastica is helping journals produce richer machine-readable metadata here.
Also, be sure to use the metadata checking resources available to you. For example, if you’re registering DOIs for articles via Crossref, you can use the Crossref Participation Reports tool to quickly see which elements your metadata includes and which are missing….”