NP2024_Transforming Research Evaluation with PIDs

Slides from “Transforming Research Evaluation with PIDs"

Description:

Most funders, institutions, publishers, and researchers agree that moving away from the Impact Factor (and, therefore, journal articles) as the main tool for evaluating research would be a good thing. However, although there has been a lot of talk about this in recent years, there has been precious little action — yet we already have many of the tools needed to transform the evaluation process. This session will focus on some of those tools, how they are already being used, albeit still on a small scale, and what is needed to achieve more widespread adoption.

Zen Faulkes (DORA), Sarala Wimaralatne (DataCite), and Richard Wynne (Rescognito) will share their thoughts from an advocacy organization, persistent identifier provider, and platform perspective, respectively. We’ll then open the floor for a wider discussion of questions such as: How much difference could the widespread adoption and use of PIDs make to evaluating research in the next 5-10 years? Are any other PIDs needed in order to move the needle on evaluating research? What is stopping people using the tools we already have? What incentives and motivations are needed for funders, institutions, publishers, researchers, and vendors to make fuller use of PIDs in evaluation? The session will end with a group brainstorm of possible actions for NISO and other organizations that would help effect the changes needed to support a fairer research evaluation process.