A recent national survey conducted in France sheds light on the adoption and use of Author Identifier Services (AIDs) among researchers. The study, published in Learned Publishing, examined how widely researchers in different disciplines utilize AIDs such as ORCID, IdHAL, ResearcherID, Scopus Author ID, and ArXivID. The findings highlight disparities in usage, a strong reliance on AIDs for external requirements rather than professional benefit, and a need for further training and support.
Key Findings: Who Uses AIDs and Why?
Conducted by Christophe Boudry and Aline Bouchard, the study surveyed 6,125 researchers across various disciplines. The data indicate that awareness and usage of AIDs are heavily influenced by researchers’ disciplines and age groups.
- Discipline Matters: Researchers in Science, Technology, and Medicine (STM) were significantly more familiar with AIDs than those in Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS).
- Age Gap: Younger researchers (under 30) were the least familiar with AIDs, while those aged 31-45 demonstrated the highest level of awareness.
- Institutional Influence: IdHAL and ORCID were the most widely recognized and used AIDs, primarily because they have been promoted through institutional policies.
Surprisingly, despite the potential benefits of AIDs in managing research outputs, researchers reported that they primarily use them to meet external requests, such as submitting articles or grant applications, rather than to streamline their own research workflows.
Barriers to Effective Use
Although AIDs were initially designed to help researchers maintain a clear, verifiable digital presence, the study found that many scholars still struggle to integrate these tools into their daily research activities. Researchers expressed uncertainty about how AIDs could directly benefit their work, beyond fulfilling institutional or publisher requirements.
Furthermore, a significant portion of researchers indicated that they lack proper training in using AIDs effectively. Over 30% of respondents stated they need an introduction or practical training to navigate these tools, with early-career researchers showing the highest demand for support.
Implications for Open Science and Research Visibility
The results of this study hold important implications for the broader academic community, particularly in the context of Open Science. The increasing emphasis on digital researcher identifiers in funding applications, institutional assessments, and publication processes means that AIDs are becoming essential tools for scholarly communication.
To bridge the existing knowledge gap, institutions and publishers need to enhance training efforts, particularly for researchers in the humanities and early-career academics. The findings also suggest a need for policies that encourage researchers to use AIDs beyond compliance, making them an integral part of research workflows.
Conclusion
The survey underscores the growing role of Author Identifier Services in academic publishing and research visibility. However, it also highlights the need for better integration, training, and policy support to ensure that researchers fully benefit from these tools. As open science initiatives continue to evolve, increasing awareness and effective use of AIDs will be crucial in ensuring greater transparency, credibility, and accessibility of scholarly work.