Blog
About

Tag: ORCID

Manage your research articles freely on ScienceOpen

In the current ecosystem of academic publishing, research outputs make a long journey from the desks of researchers to research platforms. Once a preprint has been turned into a published paper, authors have almost no influence on metadata tagging, or whether their articles got indexed in a whole world of databases and research platforms. If you have ever come across a ‘ghost profile’ of yourself on the Web, this is where it came from.

With MyScienceOpen, our vision was to create a holistic platform where researchers can flexibly interact with their research outputs, and control the content themselves. In addition to our range of visibility enhancement services and impact monitoring tools, it remains crucial to enable authors to freely manage their articles on our platform and add new content easily and in a 100% legal way.

Flexible interaction with content from publishers

As a result, we are excited to announce our new article integration feature. This is the first time that a major research networking platform facilitates interaction with content from publishers, as opposed to manually uploaded[1] records from individual authors.

In a time where we are all over-worked, it is crucial not to add to researcher fatigue. This is why we leverage ORCID for seamless and efficient integration of your research outputs into ScienceOpen.

Here, we will briefly guide you through our new content management features and share some tips and tricks to make the most out of them. Ready?

How to add your content to ScienceOpen and manage your publications

At the moment, you can add content to your ScienceOpen profile from two sources: from ORCID or form our existing corpus of 32 million article records. In addition, collection editors are also welcome to submit DOI lists, and BibTex or RefWorks files to us, and let us work our magic behind the scenes to integrate these into our database or your profile.

  • Via ORCID

ORCID integration on ScienceOpen has never been easier. Your ScienceOpen profile and list of publications can be updated directly using your ORCID profile, providing effortless integration of the two.

This means that there’s no journal policy checking, no manual uploading, and no takedown notices, as the whole thing is based directly on your publication record itself.

ORCID integration on ScienceOpen
Seamless ORCID integration on ScienceOpen 1.

The new ORCID integration button on your profile page takes you to your Dashboard where you can import articles from your ORCID account with one click. After clicking on Refresh from ORCID, your ORCID records will be automatically imported to ScienceOpen. If needed, you can update ORCID permissions or edit your ORCID profile.

Get more content on ScienceOpen
Seamless ORCID integration on ScienceOpen 2.
  • Claim authorship feature

Another option for adding content to your ScienceOpen profile is claiming authorship of articles from our research corpus. It’s simple: select the Get more content menu on your dashboard (or just click on the Get more content button on your profile). Here the Claim your articles option shows how many potentially matching articles are found for you to claim.  In case of finding this result list too long, the multi-layered searching and filtering tools available on all our search pages will help you to filter the needles from the haystack.

In addition to the Claim authorship button, a Mark as not mine button is also available on each article record waiting for your confirmation of authorship.  A click to this will ensure that the record in question will never appear again on your list. By doing so, you can help us to improve our database.

Add content to your ScienceOpen profile
Steps of adding content to your ScienceOpen profile

By claiming your articles, each record will become displayed among your publications. On the top of this, the claimed record will also be linked back into your ORCID profile via real-time synchronization.

ScienceOpen source on ORCID
Source: ScienceOpen

As a result, a reciprocal ORCID-ScienceOpen integration comes full circle.

To make the most of this feature, we share some tips & tricks in our brand new FAQ page.

Seamless and reciprocal ORCID-ScienceOpen integration
Seamless and reciprocal ORCID-ScienceOpen integration

 

3 main benefits of reciprocal ScienceOpen-ORCID integration

Joining to ORCID’s Collect & Connect initiative, our aim was to contribute to a more verified and transparent ecosystem of academic communication. By leveraging the power of reciprocal ScienceOpen-ORCID integration, we make sure that your research on ScienceOpen:

  • Is assigned to the right person

As a persistent identifier, your ORCID ID distinguishes you from other authors with similar names.  Linking back your article records available on our platform to your ORCID account helps us recognize the researcher behind the article record and hence disambiguate any conflicts in authorship and metadata.

  • Retains complete control by its author(s) in terms of visibility and metadata

Having your articles integrated to your ORCID profile allows you to edit your research metadata (e.g., to add additional information such as DOIs to your article records or to modify the list of order of authors on the article record). Furthermore, you can also list manuscripts and preprints to your ORCID account to make your research visible from its inception. This visibility however can be shaped and controlled by the privacy settings on the information in your record.

  • Is easily connectable and has cross-platform compatibility

Being listed in your ORCID profile, article records can be linked to multiple platforms though ORCID bringing about better connectivity to your research. Having therefore just one highly-integrated and detailed profile like ORCID, you can save time from manually maintaining all the different platforms.

MyScienceOpen is your ScienceOpen

When your content is complete on ScienceOpen, we will display your research in context:

  • Dynamic views of readership and Altmetrics through time
  • Total citations of your work, and links to all articles
  • Articles you have referenced available on ScienceOpen
  • Similar authors and research articles you might not be aware of
  • Have any collection Editors singled out your work?

It’s your turn now to play around with our new article management and integration features and tell us how you like them. As a next step in boosting your research impact, make use of our brand new enhance visibility tools and add non-specialist summaries, images, keywords or discipline tags to your article records. Enjoy! 🙂

[1] Here you can learn more about why we don’t support direct manual upload.

In:  About SO  

Getting started at ScienceOpen

We recognise that some times it’s not clear exactly what you’re supposed to do when joining a new research platform. What are the important features, what’s everybody else doing, how do I make my profile as strong as possible? Well, hopefully this will make it easier for you. If you’re still wondering ‘What’s that ScienceOpen thing all about?’, hopefully this will add a bit of clarity too!

Here are the main things you need to know about ScienceOpen:

  • Get an ORCID account

More than 3 million researchers already have an ORCID account, which acts as both a unique identifier and an integrated profile for them. Registration for it takes 30 seconds, and is now a core part of scholarly infrastructure, with many journals requiring an ORCID profile prior to article submission. Make sure it’s well-populated with all of your published papers, (drawn automatically from Web of Science, Scopus, or CrossRef). Easy!

  • Refresh your profile from ORCID

*click* Done.

From your profile page (eg here)

Continue reading “Getting started at ScienceOpen”  

In:  Peer Review  

A new gold standard of peer review is needed

How can something exclusive, secretive, and irreproducible be considered to be objective? How can something exclusive, secretive, and irreproducible be considered as a ‘gold standard’ of any sort?

Traditional, closed peer review has these traits, but yet for some reason held in esteem as the most rigorous and objective standard of research and knowledge generation that we have. Peer review fails peer review, and its own test of integrity and validation, and is one of the greatest ironies of the academic world.

What we need is a new standard of peer review that is suitable for a Web-based world of scholarly communication. This is to help accommodate the increasingly rapid communication of research and new sources of information, and bring peer review out of the dark (literally) ages and into one which makes sense in a world of fast, open, digital knowledge dissemination.

What should a standard for peer review look like in 2017?

The big test for peer review, and any future version of it, is how does the scientific community apply its stamp of approval?

Continue reading “A new gold standard of peer review is needed”  

In:  Profiles  

ScienceOpen membership – the how, the what, and the why!

ScienceOpen is a free network for rewarding and encouraging Open Science practices.

But what exactly can you do on our platform..?

  • New, enhanced collection features

But isn’t ScienceOpen just another social networking site?

With 101 platforms for researchers available these days, and each one vying for the proud title of ‘Facebook for science’, why should you bother with ScienceOpen?

Continue reading “ScienceOpen membership – the how, the what, and the why!”  

In:  Other  

Ten Open Science New Year resolutions

A whole new year means a chance to start or continue building your profile as an Open Scientist! There are so many ways you can do this, from publishing Open Access and sharing your research data, to helping to teach students how to code or use GitHub. Every little bit helps.

Here are ten recommendations from us to kick-start the New Year with an Open Science bang!

  1. Update your ScienceOpen profile
    • We revamped our author/member profiles recently to make them more dynamic and generally useful for researchers!

      Example of the new author profiles (link)
  2. Get your author- and article-level metrics
    • They’re all right there on your profile page
    • They provide a great accompaniment to other ‘impact’ profiles such as with ImpactStory
  3. Get an ORCID account
    • ORCID is an essential part of research infrastructure
    • We use ORCID in multiple ways on our platform to make things easier for you
  4. Build a research collection for your community
    • Collections are now even better ways of getting your community to engage with research now
    • Just message me to get started!

      Enhanced collection features
  5. Use social media more – get it together!
    • Social media is an essential part of a researcher’s toolkit
    • Get on Twitter, start blogging, amplify your research!
  6. Upload your papers as pre- or post-prints
    • Use the SHERPA/RoMEO tool to see what journal policies are
    • Submit your manuscripts to an institutional or subject repository
    • Make your work Open Access easily and for free!

      Most journals allow self-archiving of some sort (source)
  7. Comment on or post-publication peer review an article
  8. Get an ImpactStory profile and tell your research story
    • ImpactStory is similarly integrated with ORCID, and is a great and fun way of documenting your story as a researcher

      ImpactStory profile example (link)
  9. Get a Publons account for your pre- and post-publication peer reviews
  10. Get informed about Open Science developments at a global level
    • Open Science is a vast and complex topic, see our Open Science Stars series for some context
    • We all need to take the responsibility in making sure we understand why making our research more open is important, and how to go about doing this

Do you have any Open Science New Years resolutions? Let us know in the comments!

In:  Other  

Welcome to ScienceOpen version 2.017

Kick off the new year with the new unified search on ScienceOpen! We have accomplished a lot over the last year and are looking forward to supporting the academic community in 2017.

In 2016 ScienceOpen brought you more context: Now your search comes with a new analytics bar that breaks down your search results by collections, journals, publishers, disciplines, and keywords for quicker filtering. Try a search for the pressing topics of 2016 like Zika or CRISPR and take the new features for a spin.

Researcher output, journal content, reference lists, citing articles can all be dynamically sorted and explored via Altmetric score, citations, date, activity. Statistics for journals, publishers and authors give overview of the content that we are indexing on ScienceOpen. Check out the most relevant journals on ScienceOpen, for example BMC Infectious Diseases or PloS Genetics for a new perspective. Or add your publications to your ORCID and get a dynamic view of your own output.

Image by Epic Fireworks, Flickr, CC BY

In 2016 ScienceOpen brought you more content: We welcomed publisher customers across the entire spectrum of disciplines to ScienceOpen and expect many more for the upcoming year. We added multiple journals from Brill, River Publishers, Open Library of Humanities, Higher Education Press and featured collections for PeerJ Computer Science, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Molecular Case Studies and the Italian Society for Victimology. We had the pleasure to work with a very diverse group, from STM to HSS, from open access to subscription-based journals, creating interdisciplinary bridges and new connections for their content. We further integrated all of SciELO on ScienceOpen this year for a more global perspective and have had a great time working with them. We are at over 27 million article records and adding content every day.

In 2016 ScienceOpen brought you more open: The ScienceOpen team participated in and helped organize numerous community events promoting Open Science. From Peer Review Week to OpenCon, talks at SSP in Vancouver and SpotOn in London, our team was on the road, debating hot issues in scholarly communication.

In order to bring more visibility to smaller community open access journals, very often with close to non-existent funding and run on a voluntary basis, we launched our platinum indexing competition. It was geared towards open access journals charging no APCs to their authors. Four successful rounds in, we have selected 18 journals to be indexed and awarded some of them with special featured collections on the ScienceOpen platform. This activity was particularly rewarding as we heard back from journals’ editors expressing their enthusiasm about the ScienceOpen project and enjoying bigger usage numbers on their content.

The ScienceOpen 2.017 version will continue to focus on context, content and open science. We are your starting point for academic discovery and networking. Together let’s explore new ways to support visibility for your publications, promote peer review, improve search and discovery and facilitate collection building. Here is to putting research in context! The year 2016 had some great moments – may 2017 bring many, many more!

Your ScienceOpen team

In:  About SO  

Dynamic view of author’s works on ScienceOpen profile

With the launch of our new unified search interface, we restructured the Author Profile page on ScienceOpen, providing dynamic ways to explore an author’s output.

For a very prolific author like Ray Dolan, Director of the Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging at UCL and author of 674 articles, it can be hard work for a reader to even just scroll through the titles of his total output. The new ScienceOpen author profile, however, provides the researcher a variety of avenues to delve into this content on their own terms. They can sort publications by Altmetric score, citations, usage, date or reviews – to find the view that fits their needs.

New enhanced author profiles!

The left side-bar overview shows top collections, journals, publishers, keywords and disciplines. Users can also search within the publication list with a free-text search or add up to 14 filters to find exactly the content that is relevant to them

The top metrics bar provides a view on total usage of the articles on the site and activity by the author. And if you want to know more about the background of the author just click on the profile button for biography and more.

How does it work? From the beginning ScienceOpen has worked closely with ORCID and required an ORCID ID for active participation in the network. We draw our information therefore from a user’s public profile. If we detect an author who is not identified in our network with an ORCID (we are tracking nearly 15 million authors), we mark the profile as “record” to indicate a lower level of reliability; for example, this profile from Jonathan A. Eisen:

Integrate your ORCID account to activate your full profile record
Useful author-level metrics and context

Below are several examples of interesting profiles on ScienceOpen to inspire you. We welcome you to search, explore, link your ORCID to your own profile and share your experience with us. At ScienceOpen we are striving to serve the academic community and always welcome your input.

Alexander Grossmann

Philip Stark

Yang Gan

Thomas Rosenau

Dasapta Erwin Irawan: The state of Open Science in Indonesia and how to drive change to make research better for everyone

Full steam ahead with our incredible Open Science Stars! We hope you’ve been enjoying it so far, and today we’re bringing you Dasapta Erwin Irawan, a a researcher based in Indonesia at the interface between Engineering, Hydrogeology and Geoscience, and an avid open science supporter. Enjoy his story!

When did you first hear about ‘open science’? What was your first reaction, do you remember?
It’s kind of funny, I heard it first from you :). (Ed: *sniff*) It was one of your blog post in 2012 Relocation, and a chance to try some open science-ing that gave me ideas of sharing my results as fast as I can and as wide as I can. I had finished my PhD when I first read it and your posts on EGU blog. There I noticed your hash tags ‘#OpenPhD` then followed it. I wasn’t serious in using my Twitter handle for academic purposes back then. My first reaction was, to make all my published papers available online, posted them all on my ResearchGate account and my blog.

You have a very strong commitment to open science. What is it that drives this for you?

My strong commitment has been built by seeing so many other doing the same thing. In Indonesia, where not many universities have subscription to major journals, open science could be the answer of what we’ve been looking for. Everybody here keeps saying to submit papers to major paywalled journals, as they have good reputation and indexed by WoS or Scopus, while it should not be that way. What we need in Indonesia is to keep writing, write more in English and find a way to make it easier to be found and accessible by others, as if it was indexed by WoS and Scopus. And I see by using the latest free and open source services, we can do that.

In Indonesia, where not many universities have subscription to major journals, open science could be the answer of what we’ve been looking for

Continue reading “Dasapta Erwin Irawan: The state of Open Science in Indonesia and how to drive change to make research better for everyone”  

In:  Peer Review  

Can blog posts be used as peer reviews?

There are many many amazing blogs and bloggers out there that provide critical comments, context, and feedback on the ‘formally published’ research literature. One problem with these though is that they are often divorced from the papers themselves, perhaps lost on obscure websites, or not hitting the right target audience. This seems like an awful waste, don’t you think?

While some great initiatives such as The Winnower will now publish blog posts openly, these still are not connected to the papers that they are based on, if they are indeed written about particular papers. But what do researchers think about blogging as a form of scholarly communication in the form of post-publication peer review?

So as with most of my ponderings, I took to Twitter to get some feedback with a little poll. I actually framed the question a little ambiguously, but this shouldn’t sufficiently skew the data in any direction (I hope).

What is interesting to me is that 41% of people who answered, who undoubtedly did not constitute just a researcher sample, do not consider blogging to ‘count’ as peer review. I would really love to know why this is the case for some people. Perhaps they haven’t seen good examples, or perhaps just because it’s not formalised in any way, and quite disassociated from the research literature.

Continue reading “Can blog posts be used as peer reviews?”  

In:  ORCID  

ORCID integration at ScienceOpen

ORCID integration has been at the heart of our publishing system since our inception. We like to think that this demonstrates that ScienceOpen was already thinking way ahead of the curve for the future of publishing, and recognising the importance of infrastructure and the value of unique identifiers. ORCID is now a major part of the scholarly communications infrastructure, and becoming more so with each passing day.

At ScienceOpen, registration with us requires registration with ORCID. In fact, if you register with us, we will automatically provide you the options for registering with ORCID.

Why is this important?

At ScienceOpen, we have always supported the use of ORCID within our services. Membership at ScienceOpen can be updated directly using your ORCID profile, providing seamless integration of the two.

To comment, review and rate articles, we require an ORCID along with membership at ScienceOpen. If you have more than 5 articles within your ORCID profile, you’ll gain Expert member status with us, and free reign of services! We feel this is important to maintain a high standard of quality for our peer review services. This isn’t to say that those without ORCID wouldn’t be great referees, it’s just that this is an explicit minimum standard.

Here’s a little table to help make this a little easier to understand. We’re evolving all the time to adapt to the needs of the research community, so please let us know if there’s anything we can do to enhance our services!

Continue reading “ORCID integration at ScienceOpen”  

  Previous page
12