{"title":"爱尔兰高等教育中的反抗与权力:ORCID 和受监控的大学","authors":"Frank Houghton , Allen Foster","doi":"10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Created in 2012 ORCID now enjoys global status as a Persistent Identifier (PID) in the academic community. The international literature has been generally positive towards this new piece of research infrastructure, particularly based on its obvious potential to aid name disambiguation. However, a small number of commentators have highlighted negative issues with ORCID, as well as the way in which they are increasing mandated by publishers, funders, and even employers. This research sought to critically evaluate perceptions of ORCID in the Technological University (TU)/Institute of Technology (IoT) sector in Ireland.</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>This study adopted a mixed methods approach involving an online survey with academics in Ireland's TU/IoT sector and a survey of senior librarians. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore the qualitative data collected via open-ended questions.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>The results indicate that most lecturers have only minimally engaged with ORCID. Thematic analysis of responses from faculty identified six distinct themes. The majority of themes identified were negative towards ORCID, with many lecturers appearing unsure about its purpose, having only registered for ORCID because of external pressure. Faculty were also concerned that ORCID could facilitate external monitoring, as well as them being resistant to the effort involved in keeping an ORCID profile up to date. ORCID was also seen as a potential source of danger, although some lecturers had started to use their ORCID profile to promote their work. Perceptions amongst librarians were very different, with librarians notably more in favour of ORCID. Three themes were identified: name disambiguation, facilitation of linkages with other IT systems, and future potential.</p></div><div><h3>Originality</h3><p>The paper offers a critical analysis of ORCID adoption in Ireland based on perceptions amongst two stakeholder groups, academics and librarians.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47762,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Academic Librarianship","volume":"50 2","pages":"Article 102853"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133324000144/pdfft?md5=a4c3673dc5ce416bb5c71af5361c6c87&pid=1-s2.0-S0099133324000144-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resistance and Power in Irish Higher Education: ORCID and the Monitored University\",\"authors\":\"Frank Houghton , Allen Foster\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102853\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Created in 2012 ORCID now enjoys global status as a Persistent Identifier (PID) in the academic community. The international literature has been generally positive towards this new piece of research infrastructure, particularly based on its obvious potential to aid name disambiguation. However, a small number of commentators have highlighted negative issues with ORCID, as well as the way in which they are increasing mandated by publishers, funders, and even employers. This research sought to critically evaluate perceptions of ORCID in the Technological University (TU)/Institute of Technology (IoT) sector in Ireland.</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>This study adopted a mixed methods approach involving an online survey with academics in Ireland's TU/IoT sector and a survey of senior librarians. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore the qualitative data collected via open-ended questions.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>The results indicate that most lecturers have only minimally engaged with ORCID. Thematic analysis of responses from faculty identified six distinct themes. The majority of themes identified were negative towards ORCID, with many lecturers appearing unsure about its purpose, having only registered for ORCID because of external pressure. Faculty were also concerned that ORCID could facilitate external monitoring, as well as them being resistant to the effort involved in keeping an ORCID profile up to date. ORCID was also seen as a potential source of danger, although some lecturers had started to use their ORCID profile to promote their work. Perceptions amongst librarians were very different, with librarians notably more in favour of ORCID. Three themes were identified: name disambiguation, facilitation of linkages with other IT systems, and future potential.</p></div><div><h3>Originality</h3><p>The paper offers a critical analysis of ORCID adoption in Ireland based on perceptions amongst two stakeholder groups, academics and librarians.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Academic Librarianship\",\"volume\":\"50 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 102853\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133324000144/pdfft?md5=a4c3673dc5ce416bb5c71af5361c6c87&pid=1-s2.0-S0099133324000144-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Academic Librarianship\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133324000144\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Academic Librarianship","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133324000144","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Resistance and Power in Irish Higher Education: ORCID and the Monitored University
Purpose
Created in 2012 ORCID now enjoys global status as a Persistent Identifier (PID) in the academic community. The international literature has been generally positive towards this new piece of research infrastructure, particularly based on its obvious potential to aid name disambiguation. However, a small number of commentators have highlighted negative issues with ORCID, as well as the way in which they are increasing mandated by publishers, funders, and even employers. This research sought to critically evaluate perceptions of ORCID in the Technological University (TU)/Institute of Technology (IoT) sector in Ireland.
Methodology
This study adopted a mixed methods approach involving an online survey with academics in Ireland's TU/IoT sector and a survey of senior librarians. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore the qualitative data collected via open-ended questions.
Findings
The results indicate that most lecturers have only minimally engaged with ORCID. Thematic analysis of responses from faculty identified six distinct themes. The majority of themes identified were negative towards ORCID, with many lecturers appearing unsure about its purpose, having only registered for ORCID because of external pressure. Faculty were also concerned that ORCID could facilitate external monitoring, as well as them being resistant to the effort involved in keeping an ORCID profile up to date. ORCID was also seen as a potential source of danger, although some lecturers had started to use their ORCID profile to promote their work. Perceptions amongst librarians were very different, with librarians notably more in favour of ORCID. Three themes were identified: name disambiguation, facilitation of linkages with other IT systems, and future potential.
Originality
The paper offers a critical analysis of ORCID adoption in Ireland based on perceptions amongst two stakeholder groups, academics and librarians.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, an international and refereed journal, publishes articles that focus on problems and issues germane to college and university libraries. JAL provides a forum for authors to present research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance; analyze policies, practices, issues, and trends; speculate about the future of academic librarianship; present analytical bibliographic essays and philosophical treatises. JAL also brings to the attention of its readers information about hundreds of new and recently published books in library and information science, management, scholarly communication, and higher education. JAL, in addition, covers management and discipline-based software and information policy developments.