Use of Research Organizations Registry (ROR) identifiers in author academic profiles: the case of Google Scholar Profiles

Main Article Content

Enrique Orduña-Malea
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1989-8477
Núria Bautista-Puig
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2404-0683

Research organizations' persistent identifiers allow for reducing affiliation ambiguities, enable accurate institutional analyses and favor the design of modern online scholarly databases suited for research discovery and research evaluation. However, few studies have attempted to quantify their degree of use. Precisely, the purpose of this work is to determine the use of Research Organizations Registry (ROR) IDs in author academic profiles, specifically in Google Scholar Profiles (GSP). To do this, all the Google Scholar profiles including the term ROR in any of the public descriptive fields were collected and analyzed. The results evidence a low use of ROR IDs (1,033 profiles), mainly from a few institutions (e.g. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana in Colombia, and Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral in Ecuador hold 55.7% of all profiles), from low citation-based impact authors (45.1% of profiles attain less than 100 citations each), belonging mainly to Social Sciences (26.3%), Engineering fields (25.3%), and Natural Sciences (22.2%). Although Google Scholar does not facilitate the inclusion of identifiers, it seems that the world's leading research institutions are not recommending their researchers include these identifiers in their profiles yet.

Keywords
Google Scholar, Research organizations registry, Author profiles, Academic search engines, Persistent identifiers, Scientometrics, Meta-research

Article Details

How to Cite
Orduña-Malea, Enrique; and Bautista-Puig, Núria. “Use of Research Organizations Registry (ROR) identifiers in author academic profiles: the case of Google Scholar Profiles”. Hipertext.net, no. 25, pp. 113-22, doi:10.31009/hipertext.net.2022.i25.11.
Author Biographies

Enrique Orduña-Malea, Universitat Politècnica de València

Enrique Orduña-Malea is Technical Telecommunication Engineer, MA in Library Science, Master in Management of Multichannel Contents, and holds a PhD with a dissertation thesis about Web university rankings (Spanish thesis award). Currently, he works as a tenured Associate Professor in the Department of Audiovisual Communication, Documentation and History of Art, at the Universitat Politècnica de València. His lines of research are mainly related to the application of web-based techniques to Science Studies. Enrique also collaborates in funded research projects and international advisory activities about the web visibility of universities, researchers, journalsand other online research objects.

Núria Bautista-Puig, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Núria Bautista-Puig. She attained her BsC in Geography (Universitat de Lleida, Spain), MSc in GIS and remote sensing (Universidad de Zaragoza, Spain) and Ph.D. in Library and Information Science (2020, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, AASHE Campus Sustainability Research Award, Spanish thesis award). Currently, she is an Assistant Professor at the Departament of Librarianship and Documentation at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Her areas of expertise include the fields of information science, organizational sustainability and bibliometrics/scientometrics.

References

Delgado López-Cózar, E., Orduña-Malea, E. & Martín-Martín, A. (2019). Google Scholar as a Data Source for Research Assessment. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators (pp. 95-127). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_4

Delgado López-Cózar, E., Robinson-García, N. & Torres-Salinas, D. (2014). The Google scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23056

Demeranville, T., Brown, J., Fenner, M., Cruse, P., Haak, L., Paglione, L., Bilder, G., Lin, J. & Pentz (Eds). (2016). Organisation Identifiers - Minimum viable product requirements. https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3479141.v1

Doğan, G., Şencan, İ. & Tonta, Y. (2016). Does Dirty Data Affect Google Scholar Citations? Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301098

Jacsó, P. (2012). Google Scholar Author Citation Tracker: Is it too little, too late? Online Information Review, 36(1), 126-141. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521211209581

Kim, H. J. & Grofman, B. (2020). Who Creates a Google Scholar Profile? PS: Political Science & Politics, 53(3), 515-520. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000189

Lammey, R. (2020). Solutions for identification problems: A look at the Research Organization Registry. Science Editing, 7(1), 65-69. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.192

Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E. & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). A novel method for depicting academic disciplines through Google Scholar Citations: The case of Bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 114(3), 1251-1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2587-4

Meadows, A. (4 December 2019). Are You Ready to ROR? An Inside Look at this New Organization Identifier Registry. The Scholarly kitchen [blog]. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/04/are-you-ready-to-ror-an-inside-look-at-this-new-organization-identifier-registry

Mikki, S., Zygmuntowska, M., Gjesdal, Ø. L. & Al Ruwehy, H. A. (2015). Digital Presence of Norwegian Scholars on Academic Network Sites—Where and Who Are They? PLOS ONE, 10(11), e0142709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142709

Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., Martín-Martín, A. & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2017). The lost academic home: Institutional affiliation links in Google Scholar Citations. Online Information Review, 41(6), 762-781. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-10-2016-0302

Orduña-Malea, E., & Bautista-Puig, N. (2022). Measuring web connectivity between research organizations through ROR identifiers. 26th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2022), Granada, Spain. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6948453

Ortega, J. L., & Aguillo, I. F. (2013). Institutional and country collaboration in an online service of scientific profiles: Google Scholar Citations. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.007

Ortega, J. L. (2015a). Diferencias y evolución del impacto académico en los perfiles de Google Scholar Citations: Una aplicación de árboles de decisión. Revista española de Documentación Científica, 38(4), e102. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2015.4.1225

Ortega, J. L. (2015b). How is an academic social site populated? A demographic study of Google Scholar Citations population. Scientometrics, 104(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1593-7

Ortega, J. L. (2015c). Relationship between altmetric and bibliometric indicators across academic social sites: The case of CSIC’s members. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.004

Ortega, J. L. & Aguillo, I. F. (2012). Science is all in the eye of the beholder: Keyword maps in Google scholar citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(12), 2370-2377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22761

Ortega, J. L. & Aguillo, I. F. (2013). Institutional and country collaboration in an online service of scientific profiles: Google Scholar Citations. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.007

Ortega, J. L. & Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Microsoft academic search and Google scholar citations: Comparative analysis of author profiles: Microsoft Academic Search and Google Scholar Citations: Comparative Analysis of Author Profiles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(6), 1149-1156. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23036

Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2018). The Google Scholar h-index: Useful but burdensome metric. Scientometrics, 117(1), 631-635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2859-7

Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2021). The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: Expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3667-3672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03831-9

Thoma, B. & Chan, T. M. (2019). Using Google Scholar to track the scholarly output of research groups. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8(3), 201-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0515-4

Tsou, A., Bowman, T. D., Sugimoto, T., Lariviere, V. & Sugimoto, C. R. (2016). Self-presentation in scholarly profiles: Characteristics of images and perceptions of professionalism and attractiveness on academic social networking sites. First Monday, 21(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i4.6381

Delgado López-Cózar, E., Orduña-Malea, E. & Martín-Martín, A. (2019). Google Scholar as a Data Source for Research Assessment. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators (pp. 95-127). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_4

Delgado López-Cózar, E., Robinson-García, N. & Torres-Salinas, D. (2014). The Google scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23056

Demeranville, T., Brown, J., Fenner, M., Cruse, P., Haak, L., Paglione, L., Bilder, G., Lin, J. & Pentz (Eds). (2016). Organisation Identifiers - Minimum viable product requirements. https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3479141.v1

Doğan, G., Şencan, İ. & Tonta, Y. (2016). Does Dirty Data Affect Google Scholar Citations? Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301098

Jacsó, P. (2012). Google Scholar Author Citation Tracker: Is it too little, too late? Online Information Review, 36(1), 126-141. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521211209581

Kim, H. J. & Grofman, B. (2020). Who Creates a Google Scholar Profile? PS: Political Science & Politics, 53(3), 515-520. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000189

Lammey, R. (2020). Solutions for identification problems: A look at the Research Organization Registry. Science Editing, 7(1), 65-69. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.192

Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E. & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). A novel method for depicting academic disciplines through Google Scholar Citations: The case of Bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 114(3), 1251-1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2587-4

Meadows, A. (4 December 2019). Are You Ready to ROR? An Inside Look at this New Organization Identifier Registry. The Scholarly kitchen [blog]. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/04/are-you-ready-to-ror-an-inside-look-at-this-new-organization-identifier-registry

Mikki, S., Zygmuntowska, M., Gjesdal, Ø. L. & Al Ruwehy, H. A. (2015). Digital Presence of Norwegian Scholars on Academic Network Sites—Where and Who Are They? PLOS ONE, 10(11), e0142709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142709

Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., Martín-Martín, A. & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2017). The lost academic home: Institutional affiliation links in Google Scholar Citations. Online Information Review, 41(6), 762-781. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-10-2016-0302

Orduña-Malea, E., & Bautista-Puig, N. (2022). Measuring web connectivity between research organizations through ROR identifiers. 26th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2022), Granada, Spain. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6948453

Ortega, J. L., & Aguillo, I. F. (2013). Institutional and country collaboration in an online service of scientific profiles: Google Scholar Citations. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.007

Ortega, J. L. (2015a). Diferencias y evolución del impacto académico en los perfiles de Google Scholar Citations: Una aplicación de árboles de decisión. Revista española de Documentación Científica, 38(4), e102. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2015.4.1225

Ortega, J. L. (2015b). How is an academic social site populated? A demographic study of Google Scholar Citations population. Scientometrics, 104(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1593-7

Ortega, J. L. (2015c). Relationship between altmetric and bibliometric indicators across academic social sites: The case of CSIC’s members. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.004

Ortega, J. L. & Aguillo, I. F. (2012). Science is all in the eye of the beholder: Keyword maps in Google scholar citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(12), 2370-2377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22761

Ortega, J. L. & Aguillo, I. F. (2013). Institutional and country collaboration in an online service of scientific profiles: Google Scholar Citations. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.007

Ortega, J. L. & Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Microsoft academic search and Google scholar citations: Comparative analysis of author profiles: Microsoft Academic Search and Google Scholar Citations: Comparative Analysis of Author Profiles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(6), 1149-1156. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23036

Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2018). The Google Scholar h-index: Useful but burdensome metric. Scientometrics, 117(1), 631-635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2859-7

Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2021). The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: Expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3667-3672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03831-9

Thoma, B. & Chan, T. M. (2019). Using Google Scholar to track the scholarly output of research groups. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8(3), 201-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0515-4

Tsou, A., Bowman, T. D., Sugimoto, T., Lariviere, V. & Sugimoto, C. R. (2016). Self-presentation in scholarly profiles: Characteristics of images and perceptions of professionalism and attractiveness on academic social networking sites. First Monday, 21(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i4.6381