Author disambiguation – enabling recognition and future reward
Author disambiguation is key to author recognition. Whether your funding organization wants to review your past work before making an award, your institution needs you to provide a list of work before your promotion review, or potential collaborators are struggling to find if you’re the right person for their project, how do you openly, quickly and easily differentiate your research activities from everyone else? How can you get the recognition and reward that you deserve – without endless form filling? Many believe that the solution is ORCiD – a voluntary and open unique identifier that connects you to your research activities – ensuring your work is unambiguously attributed and discoverable by all.
As a member organization, Wiley is a big supporter of ORCiD and our online submission sites already encourage authors to register for an ORCID iD and then associate it with their account. But how does this optional unique identifier help with research evaluation and author recognition?
From August 2015, The Wellcome Trust requires that grant applicants must include their ORCID iD when they sign up with their grant application system. The reason behind this is to help researchers answer questions to secure their next grant, ‘…everyone is asking similar questions of their grant holders: what have you produced?; how openly accessible is the work you’ve published?; what shape is your career trajectory taking, and how have we changed that?’
In June 2015, Italy announced that it was implementing ORCiD nationally with 70 universities and four research centers initially participating. ‘The project’s goal is to ensure that at least 80% of Italian researchers have an ORCID iD, with links to their research output back to 2006, by the end of 2016.’ As institutions and funders continue to look for ways to track, quantify and measure their academic output, many are hopeful that ORCiD is the foundation needed to make this possible. ‘…,the incoming national assessment of research (VQR 2011-2014) will constitute an occasion not to be missed to provide all Italian professors and researchers with the ORCID identifier and to link to it the publications submitted for evaluation.’
Self-promotional tools – maximizing the recognition and reward opportunity
Research surveys, including our own, have identified that authors are active in promoting their research – as they attempt to stand out from their peers and ‘get noticed’ in their respective field. Furthermore, 89%* of these ‘self promoters’ indicated that they were concerned with measuring the impact of their work. We therefore focus our author promotional resources on helping you get the recognition you deserve.
At the forefront of our author self-promotional strategy is our partnership with Kudos – a service that helps you measure, monitor and maximize the visibility and impact of your published articles. As of October 2015, there were more than 70,000 users, including 22,000 Wiley authors, using Kudos. You can find out more by watching our video. But what does Kudos actually achieve? “The Kudos service helps authors explain (and then share) their work in plain language, enabling people in their immediate field to skim the work more quickly, and those in adjacent fields to understand its relevance to their own work.” Charlie Rapple, Co-Founder Kudos.
This increased discoverability makes it more likely that your work will be found and accessed, and you get the recognition and reward that you deserve.
Altmetric – supporting immediate recognition and reward
With the development of new article discoverability tools such as social media, blogs, videos and news outlets, there is a growing desire to incorporate some of the new article-level metrics (alongside ‘traditional’ metrics), such as the Altmetric service, to understand the more immediate and broader impact of a research article. In 2014, Wiley rolled out the Altmetric service to all journals on Wiley Online Library. The service allows you to freely track online activity and discussions about your individual scholarly papers from social media sources, including Twitter, Facebook and blogs, the mainstream media and online reference managers such as Mendeley and CiteULike. The Altmetric ‘score’ is updated daily and is open for everyone to see, follow and understand. In the past 12 months over 150,000 Wiley articles have received a mention#.
As part of assessing academic impact, there is growing evidence that institutions are monitoring article-level metrics in addition to traditional metrics such as citations. “In 2015, Altmetric data were included alongside usage and citation data, as part of the Usage and Impact reports that Wiley create and provide to all 53 Cochrane Review Groups every August. Cochrane Review Groups now consider Altmetric data when deciding which Cochrane Reviews to prioritize for updating. The data are also used by the groups to encourage authors to update their Cochrane reviews.” Gavin Stewart, Associate Editor, Cochrane.
This is further typified through the growing services offered to institutions such as the Altmetric for Institutions service. There is much you can do yourself to increase the online discussions around your work. Increasing your Altmetric score therefore represents a new and different way of achieving the recognition and reward that your work deserves.
Peer Review – creating recognition and reward
In this final section we turn our focus to Reviewers. Researchers spend a substantial amount of time reading and reviewing, but often feel under acknowledged for this important contribution to the community. Many journals offer some form of reward for their reviewers – for example, the ACES journals and their sister titles from ChemPubSoc Europe (CPSE) recently announced a pilot program to reward the top 5% of their reviewers with the opportunity to publish their next ACES or CPSE journal article open access, free of charge. Good feedback for reviewers is also important. In recent surveys reviewers have told us how highly they value feedback on the usefulness of their review and editorial outcomes – essentially, acknowledging that their time spent reviewing has been time well spent.
However, academic recognition and credit for reviewing activity are two different sides of the same coin. At Wiley we are currently running a pilot with Publons to openly give researchers credit for their peer review activity. “Peer review is the foundation for safeguarding the quality and integrity of scientific and scholarly research. Wiley’s objective is to develop a program of reviewer services in order to engage reviewers and recognize their contribution.” Miriam Maus, Vice President - Editorial Management, Wiley.
Publons have recently partnered with ORCiD to enable reviewers to link ORCID iDs to a Publons account, meaning that if you have a Publons profile you can easily connect your reviewer activities to your ORCID iD. We are also exploring other opportunities to uniquely attribute review activity to individuals via ORCiD.
As we look ahead, Wiley is committed to developing a program of services that engage and support both authors and reviewers, and help them gain the recognition and reward that they deserve. Open recognition and reward is here to stay, and we plan to be at the very heart of it.
*Based on 949 completed responses from a survey to Wiley authors from 2014. 610 indicated they had promoted their work in the previous 12 months, with the majority wanting more help/support to do this. 89% (of the 610) indicated that they were concerned with measuring the impact of their work.
#Generic term for anything that Altmetric finds valuable enough to be captured, e.g. Tweets, Facebook posts, Mendeley saves etc.
Image Credit/Source: Blend Images/Getty Images