Visibility of Scientific Production and Digital Identity of Researchers through Digital Technologies

Abstract

The research process does not end with the publication of the results; on the contrary, it has to continue even further, when results are disseminated and scientific disclosure on the Web begins. The purpose of this article is to promote visibility of the scientific production and digital identity of the faculty and researchers at the Universidad Técnica del Norte (Ibarra-Ecuador). By implementing a quantitative documentary, descriptive, and quasi-experimental comparative approach, it was possible to determine the importance of scientific visibility, the most suitable digital platforms for this task (ORCID, Google Scholar, Academia, ResearchGate, ResearcherID (WoS), Author ID (Scopus), Sciprofiles, Mendeley, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Impactstory), and the level of knowledge that professors have of these platforms. With the results, a pilot training-course was planned and implemented for researchers and university professors of the Faculty of Education Science and Technology, with the purpose of registering their author profiles and incorporating their scientific production onto the platforms with the greatest impact and visibility. The results from the two stages (pre-test and post-test) of the pilot course show a significant difference regarding the creation and management of the research profiles; therefore, this strategy puts forward an alternative way to make research and digital/identity visible in the academic, scientific and social community.

Bibliometric analysis of global scientific literature on the application and implementation of artificial intelligence in higher education

“…However, Q1 journals show greater impact (Sustainability, Education and Information Technologies), following the logic that a better-ranked journal will generate greater visibility and citations (Desai et al, 2021). Despite this, it is important to note that within the Top 10 journals with the most production, the third position is held by a Q3 journal (Mobile Information Systems) with an average citation per article of 1.3, highlighting the importance of effective editorial management for the positioning of a scienti c journal (Andrea et al, 2022).…”

Is ORCID your ID? A case study at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the University of Porto

“…Several studies show that scholars prefer ORCID as their main identifier, including Tran and Lyon (2017) and Basantes‐Andrade et al (2022). The latter states that ORCID is ‘one of the best known and most‐used platforms by research professors in this study […] ORCID has been considered in recent years as the main identifier for researchers’ (p. 12).…”

Digital Presence and Online Identity among Digital Scholars: A Thematic Analysis

“…Thus, the traditional scholar is expected to take on new roles, which has given rise to new designations, such as "Digital Scholar" (Weller 2011), "Networked Participatory Scholar " (Veletsianos and Kimmons 2012;Veletsianos 2016), or "Open Educational Scholar" (Jhangiani 2017;Nascimbeni 2020). In this context, several studies have been made about the question of Scholarly Networks, namely about Social Network Sites (SNS), Institutional Repositories and Academic Social Networks (ASNs) (Dron and Anderson 2014;Nentwich and König 2014;Basantes-Andrade et al 2022). Just as several studies have been developed investigating the issues of scholarly networks there have also been several qualitative studies that seek to study the issue of Scholars in Networks (Stewart 2015;Veletsianos 2016;Grand et al 2016), attempting to capture and analyze the concrete experience of scholars in their experiencing of interaction and connection, sharing, and collaboration in networks, beyond the restricted contexts of the academy.…”