As AI is quickly reshaping scholarly communication by making it possible for paper mills to scale fake research, it’s imperative that stakeholders in the global research ecosystem utilize and contribute to a robust, interconnected infrastructure of persistent identifiers (PIDs). Cultivating a resilient and trustworthy scholarly community was a core message of the NISO Plus conference in Baltimore, a unique gathering where librarians, publishers, vendors, and infrastructure providers come together around scholarly communication. From Brandie Nonnecke’s opening keynote on the urgent need for AI governance to Alondra Nelson’s Miles Conrad Lecture on the social responsibility of data, the message was clear: the universal interoperability of PIDs forms a necessary bedrock of trust with today’s threats to research integrity.
ORCID’s founding mission is to enable transparent and trustworthy connections between researchers, their contributions, and their affiliations—but we’ve never believed that we could, nor should, go it alone. Even as ORCID serves as a central hub in a Community Trust Network powered by our members, the ORCID iD is not a standalone persistent identifier (PID). The power of PIDs lies in their universal interoperability in the scholarly systems used by stakeholders across the research ecosystem. The consistent use of metadata best practices by publishers, funders, research institutions, and others is essential to collectively upholding research trust and integrity.
This year, ORCID participated in two pivotal conversations that addressed this head-on. The first explored how diverse identifier systems can work together to achieve universal interoperability, while the second focused on defining Trust Markers as record items added by trusted member organizations like universities, publishers, or funders.
The “ORCID and” approach
One highlight of our week was participating in the session, “Better Together: How Diverse Researcher Identifier Systems can Work Together to Meet Community-Specific Needs while Achieving the Goal of Universal Interoperability.”
ORCID presented alongside Alice Meadows (MoreBrains), Edward Dunne (American Mathematical Society), and Christine Dunn (Clarivate) to tackle a question we hear often: “If I have a national identifier or a disciplinary ID, why do I need an ORCID iD?”
Our answer is consistent: It’s “ORCID and,” not “ORCID or.”
During the panel, we explored how various identifier systems are not competitors, but rather complementary components of a healthy research ecosystem. Whether it’s a national system designed for government reporting or a disciplinary database tailored to a specific field’s nuances, these systems serve vital local needs. However, for research to be truly discoverable and interoperable on a global scale, these systems must communicate with one another.
Some key points we discussed included:
- The Power of Bridges: How integrations between ORCID and other IDs reduce the administrative burden on researchers, allowing data to flow seamlessly between systems.
- Breaking Barriers: Identifying the technical and cultural hurdles that prevent adoption in certain communities and how we can work collectively to lower those walls.
- Universal Interoperability: Why a 16-digit ORCID iD acts as the “glue” that allows diverse systems to remain specialized while still being part of a global, linked data network.
The landscape of researcher identifiers is comprised of National IDs, Disciplinary IDs, and Propriety IDs
Building a Community Trust Network
ORCID also participated in a second session: “Perspectives on Trust Markers in Scholarly Publishing.” In this panel, we discussed the emerging NISO Recommended Practice for Trust Markers and how ORCID’s own Community Trust Network plays a foundational role.
Key takeaways included:
- The “Nutrition Label” for Research: We previewed PKP’s new Publication Facts Label, which was designed to help readers understand scholarly publishing standards.
- Provenance as a Priority: For ORCID, a “Trust Marker” is any item in a record validated by an ORCID member organization. When a publisher or institution adds data to a record, they create a “trusted connection” that signals the authenticity of the claim.
- Standardization is Key: We discussed the challenge of industry-wide standardization. For Trust Markers to work, they must be machine-actionable—allowing AI and discovery tools to “read” the integrity of a paper as easily as a human does.
Like other models, ORCID emphasizes that Trust Markers in scholarly publishing is a community effort among researchers and publishers.
Beyond silos: ORCID’s commitment to a connected, healthy research landscape
Research misconduct is not simply about individual ethics, but also about institutions preserving their reputations. PIDs, when used consistently following best practices for metadata standards, offer the universal interoperability and verifiable provenance that form the bedrock of a healthy, trustworthy research landscape. PIDs for people (ORCID), organizations (ROR), and works (DOIs), among others, work together to ensure that researchers get attribution while their outputs can be validated and traced back to a trustworthy source.
After our time at NISO Plus, we are greatly encouraged by the insights and connections made, which reinforce our work toward a more interconnected and secure research ecosystem. You can read more about these commitments in our latest four-year strategic plan. As we endeavor to work toward our goals, we also invite you to dive deeper into our “ORCID and” philosophy on our Partners Page.
Want more? Dive into understanding how FAIR metadata guidelines contribute to building a more robust and interconnected scholarly research ecosystem the world over. Let us know how we can help!
