Getting researcher buy-in to new tools and systems can be challenging – even when those tools are intended to help free them of administrative burden. A community approach, such as the publisher-led initiative to require ORCID iDs for authors, can be very effective.
PIDapalooza, the first ever festival of persistent identifiers, set out not only to bring together the creators and users of PIDs, but also to make PIDs cool. Did it succeed? Find out in this report on the event from Alice Meadows and Phill Jones
We typically classify publishers as Old Media and New Media, but now we have companies that are part of a new paradigm, the Dat Media company. Such companies sit above both Old and New, studying patterns in usage and in the databases of information aggregated by publishers.
Think persistent identifiers are a bit boring? Think again! PIDapalooza, the first open festival of persistent identifiers, aims to challenge that view. Find out more, including how you can get involved.
While many of the traditional publishing tasks remain intact, new tasks that are much more technical in nature have changed the skill sets required to be scholarly publishers. As new and developing standards and services such as Funder Identification, ORCID, CHORUS, and more come online, publishers and their vendors must integrate when they would rather innovate. The trick is in realizing where integration allows more innovation.
A group of eight publishers today announced that, during 2016, they will begin requiring authors to use an ORCID identifier (iD) during the publication process. The first to do so is The Royal Society, which has introduced this requirement beginning January 1, 2016. In this interview, their Publishing Director, Stuart Taylor, explains why.
Last week ORCID published the results of its first major survey. Around 6,000 respondents globally – ORCID record holders and non record holders – provided feedback on their perceptions and understanding of ORCID. Find out what they said…
Inspired by this year’s VIVO conference, this post looks at why we need a better understanding of how the scholarly research infrastructure works today in order to keep improving it for the future.
Charlie Rapple reports back from ISMTE, which does not stand for the International Society of Making Toys Educational
The recent ORCID-CASRAI conference in Barcelona brought together over 150 researchers, research administrators, funders, publishers, vendors, and others working in scholarly communications to discuss research evaluation, with a particular focus on social science and humanities – resulting in some interesting conversations and observations
The majority of time spent in editing and formatting citations in the publication process is time wasted. We now have in place nearly all the components to use persistent identifiers, linked metadata, and style sheets to improve how citations can be structured and processed. Using these tools can significantly improve the accuracy of references and reduce the time editors spend on this production function. Even when automated, we bounce between linked metadata, then to text, then to metadata again.
As ORCID comes close to reaching it’s goals for registrations, the organization is not yet financially stable. Laurel Haak, executive director of ORCID, answers questions about where they are at and what is coming for users and members.
We’ve got DOIs (digital object identifiers) to help identify research articles, images, and other digital objects, and ORCIDs (Open Researcher and Contributor IDs) to help disambiguate the authors of those objects. Now there’s a new initiative to create a contributor taxonomy that identifies who’s done what in the creation of published research – find out more in our interview with Amy Brand, one of the brains behind the concept.
Attempts to use new measurements to more finely predict or represent journal quality are bound to falter because of some qualities inherent to journals themselves.
A ruse to self-review and self-recommend papers for publication leads to 60 retractions. Can we find a way to prevent this kind of identity fraud and its consequences?