Here’s a detailed article about the news from Current Awareness Portal, written in a polite tone and in English:
Enhancing Research Identity: Exploring the Synergy of ORCID and Other Researcher Identifiers
The National Diet Library’s Current Awareness Portal recently featured an insightful article titled “ORCID and Collaboration with Other Researcher Identifiers: Recommending Combination Over Selection (Literature Review),” published on August 1, 2025, at 06:58. This piece delves into the evolving landscape of researcher identification and highlights the growing consensus around leveraging multiple identifiers to create a more robust and interconnected research ecosystem.
In an era where the global research community increasingly relies on digital platforms and data sharing, accurately identifying and attributing scholarly contributions has become paramount. While ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) has emerged as a leading, persistent digital identifier for researchers, the literature review underscores the importance of recognizing that it is not a singular solution but rather a powerful component within a broader framework of research identification.
The article, presented as a literature review, likely synthesizes findings from various studies and reports that examine the benefits and challenges of using different researcher identifiers. This includes, but is not limited to, identifiers such as Scopus Author ID, ResearcherID (now Web of Science ResearcherID), Google Scholar Profiles, and institutional identifiers. The central theme appears to be a shift from viewing these identifiers as competing entities, where researchers might feel compelled to “choose” one over others, towards understanding their complementary strengths and recommending a strategic “combination.”
Why the Emphasis on Combination?
The rationale behind recommending a combination of identifiers is multi-faceted:
- Comprehensive Profiling: Each identifier may capture different facets of a researcher’s scholarly output. For instance, ORCID excels at linking all research activities, including publications, datasets, and funding, to a unique, stable ID. Meanwhile, other identifiers might be more deeply integrated with specific publisher platforms, citation databases, or institutional systems, offering unique perspectives on a researcher’s impact and affiliations.
- Interoperability and Data Flow: By linking multiple identifiers, researchers can facilitate smoother data flow across various scholarly infrastructure. This enhances the ability of discovery tools, repositories, and funding agencies to accurately track and attribute research, reducing manual effort and potential errors.
- Mitigating Platform Dependence: Relying solely on one identifier can create dependencies on the platform that manages it. A multi-identifier approach offers a degree of resilience, ensuring that a researcher’s identity and contributions remain accessible even if a particular platform undergoes changes or experiences disruptions.
- Enhanced Discoverability and Visibility: A connected web of identifiers can significantly improve the discoverability of a researcher’s work. When different systems can cross-reference a researcher through their various IDs, the likelihood of their publications, datasets, and other contributions being found and cited increases.
- Addressing Diverse Needs: Different stakeholders within the research ecosystem may have varying needs and rely on different systems. A researcher utilizing multiple identifiers can cater to these diverse requirements, ensuring their work is properly recognized by publishers, funders, institutions, and collaborators alike.
The Role of ORCID in a Multi-Identifier Strategy
While advocating for combination, ORCID’s role as a central hub remains critical. Its open, non-proprietary nature and its widespread adoption by institutions, publishers, and funding bodies make it an ideal anchor for a researcher’s identity. The literature reviewed likely highlights how ORCID can serve as the primary link, with researchers strategically connecting their other identifiers to their ORCID record. This creates a unified view of their scholarly presence, accessible through their ORCID iD.
Implications for Researchers and Institutions
For individual researchers, this trend suggests a proactive approach to managing their digital identity. This involves:
- Creating and maintaining profiles on relevant identifier systems.
- Strategically linking these profiles to their ORCID record.
- Ensuring consistency in name and affiliation across all identifiers.
For institutions, the findings emphasize the importance of supporting and promoting the use of multiple researcher identifiers among their faculty and researchers. This could involve:
- Providing training and resources on how to manage these identifiers.
- Integrating identifier management into institutional workflows and systems.
- Encouraging the adoption of ORCID as a standard for researcher identification.
In conclusion, the article featured on the Current Awareness Portal serves as a valuable reminder that in the pursuit of robust research identity management, collaboration and integration are key. By embracing a strategy that combines ORCID with other relevant researcher identifiers, the scholarly community can foster greater accuracy, discoverability, and connectivity, ultimately strengthening the impact of research worldwide.
ORCIDとその他の研究者識別子との連携：選択ではなく組み合わせの推奨（文献紹介）
AI has delivered the news.
The answer to the following question is obtained from Google Gemini.
カレントアウェアネス・ポータル published ‘ORCIDとその他の研究者識別子との連携：選択ではなく組み合わせの推奨（文献紹介）’ at 2025-08-01 06:58. Please write a detailed article about this news in a polite tone with relevant information. Please reply in English with the article only.