profi online research

​We are a tech research company specializing in creating authentic, human-made datasets tailored for AI and ML applications. Whether you need to enrich existing datasets with additional data points or develop new sets with insights from real humanss, we provide precise solutions aligned with your specific needs. We proudly offer only authentic, up-to-date, and proprietary data, ensuring the highest quality and reliability for our clients.

With a solid research background, we excel in crafting unbiased questions to obtain accurate answers. Our global reach of 14 million people enables us to capture regional nuances in your data effectively. Leveraging extensive experience in customized ML modeling, we address common challenges in AI projects, particularly focusing on data-related challenges.

PRC operates as a comprehensive online market research agency offering both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies such as online surveys, focus groups, in-depth interviews, and more. We drive digital transformation through advanced analytics, insights, and machine learning technologies. As pioneers in online research, we continually innovate by digitalizing traditional methodologies and introducing new approaches. With our vast amount of historical data, we develop proprietary predictive models for digitalizing and automating the marketing sphere.

Annually, we collect over 3.5 million data points for our clients. PRC has been an ESOMAR member since 2007, adhering strictly to industry standards and guidelines, and ensuring the highest ethical and operational practices.

Chief Technology Officer, Co-founder

Kevin Duin holds a degree in Computer Science and is a dynamic IT leader with over 25 years of experience in software development and service engineering. He excels in strategic planning, budgeting, and team management. His combination of technical expertise and strategic acumen enables him to deliver impactful IT solutions that drive innovation and efficiency. Kevin is responsible for overseeing the development of proprietary AI products, steering technology initiatives with a focus on innovation and operational excellence.

Elena Duin-Smirnova

Elena is a dynamic leader with 20 years of experience in marketing and research. Her diverse entrepreneurial endeavors and expertise in digital marketing and data science position her as an industry leader. Elena holds an MBA in Marketing and an MS in Economics, which have equipped her with deep and broad knowledge in her field.

Elena’s comprehensive experience and strategic vision make her a key player in driving growth and innovation in the marketing and research industry.

Artem Duplinskiy

Data Science Director

Artem Duplinskiy is a seasoned Data Science Expert with a rich background in academia and industry. He leads innovative AI and ML projects for our Clients. Artem also lectures at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, teaching Data Science to second and third-year students, applying machine learning and econometric methods to real-world datasets.

Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations

Armen yuri gasparyan.

1 Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UK.

Bekaidar Nurmashev

2 South Kazakhstan State Pharmaceutical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan.

Marlen Yessirkepov

3 Department of Biochemistry, Biology and Microbiology, South Kazakhstan State Pharmaceutical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan.

Dmitry A. Endovitskiy

4 Voronezh State University, Voronezh, Russian Federation.

Alexander A. Voronov

5 Department of Marketing and Trade Deals, Kuban State University, Krasnodar, Russian Federation.

George D. Kitas

6 Arthritis Research UK Epidemiology Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Currently available online profiling platforms offer various services for researchers and authors. Opening an individual account and filling it with scholarly contents increase visibility of research output and boost its impact. This article overviews some of the widely used and emerging profiling platforms, highlighting their tools for sharing scholarly items, crediting individuals, and facilitating networking. Global bibliographic databases and search platforms, such as Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar, are widely used for profiling authors with indexed publications. Scholarly networking websites, such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu, provide indispensable services for researchers poorly visible elsewhere on the Internet. Several specialized platforms are designed to offer profiling along with their main functionalities, such as reference management and archiving. The Open Researcher and Contributor Identification (ORCID) project has offered a solution to the author name disambiguation. It has been integrated with numerous bibliographic databases, platforms, and manuscript submission systems to help research managers and journal editors select and credit the best reviewers, and other scholarly contributors. Individuals with verifiable reviewer and editorial accomplishments are also covered by Publons, which is an increasingly recognized service for publicizing and awarding reviewer comments. Currently available profiling formats have numerous advantages and some limitations. The advantages are related to their openness and chances of boosting the researcher impact. Some of the profiling websites are complementary to each other. The underutilization of various profiling websites and their inappropriate uses for promotion of ‘predatory’ journals are among reported limitations. A combined approach to the profiling systems is advocated in this article.

INTRODUCTION

Comprehensive evaluation of research performance is an increasingly important task for the research and publishing enterprise in the era of digitization, open access, and diversification of social networking ( 1 ). A wide variety of individual and institutional websites is now available to keep the global scientific community abreast of ongoing research projects, published articles, conferences, and opportunities for collaboration. The digitization of the individual curriculum vitae has advanced the archiving of scholarly articles, books, presentations, and audio and video materials in specifically designed websites, which were not available even a decade ago ( 2 ). The accuracy, transparency, and completeness of information on such platforms mark the professionalism and scientific prestige of the creators and moderators.

Online profiles are increasingly employed for evaluating prospective academic mentors, authors, reviewers and journal editors, for sharing and commenting on scholarly articles, and establishing scholarly networks. For the global scientific community, one of the most important components of such profiles is the article in English ( 3 , 4 ). Subsequently, simultaneous searches through the global databases and platforms, such as MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, increase chances of retrieving relevant items and navigating through the authors' profiles for their comprehensive evaluation ( 5 ). The journal editors often refer to profiles of their contributors in their editorial management systems, linked to bibliographic databases and search platforms, for improving their quality checks and promoting the best contributors. Publishers and editors are strongly encouraged to evaluate academic profiles and online identifiers of their contributors to avoid ‘fake’ reviewer commenting and other forms misconduct ( 6 ). Several search platforms, scholarly networking websites, and bibliographic databases have adjusted their online tools to offer regularly updated information on researchers and authors for advanced profiling and aggregating scholarly information.

This article provides an overview of some of the established and emerging profiling platforms ( Table 1 ).

ORCID = Open Researcher and Contributor Identification, RePEc = Research Paper in Economics.

PROFILING PLATFORMS

Scopus author identifiers.

Scopus author identifiers are unique digital links to research performance of individual scholars in any academic discipline. Such identifiers are automatically generated when the authors get at least one Scopus-indexed item, allowing them to track and analyse their citation data, and particularly the h-index values, display professional keywords, affiliations, and links to their co-authors' profiles. Advanced tools are now available to navigate through authors' list of publications, analyse their annual publication activity, highly-cited items, target journals, names of co-authors, article types, and subject areas. Scopus profiles may also include the Open Researcher and Contributor Identification (ORCID), which are now searchable through a separate browsing window at the Scopus interface. Such information is available for free previews and can be processed for ranking authors in certain fields and evaluating their impact over time ( 7 ).

The recent integration of PlumX Metrics with Scopus has added a new direction to the online profiling by aggregating information on article-level metrics, such as usage (downloads, HTML views), captures (bookmarks), mentions (blog posts, e-comments, Wikipedia references), social media attention, and citation counts beyond Scopus ( 8 ). Comparisons with other altmetrics tools, such as ImpactStory, proved that PlumX has the most comprehensive coverage of social resonance of scholarly information ( 9 ). Subscribing institutions can now open individual accounts on the PlumX dashboard to comprehensively track their researchers' impact ( 10 ).

Although Scopus author identifiers are linked to records of the largest abstract and citation database, limited timeline of the contents coverage (mostly back to 1996) may distort profiles of scholars with longer academic career and higher citations of their initial works, which are not yet covered by this database. Scopus profiles may also contain technical mistakes due to the automatic processing of data and generating more than one identifier for the same author. Such a limitation can be overcome by regularly monitoring updates and merging two or more profiles at the request of the users.

ResearcherID

In contrast to Scopus, Web of Science does not automatically generate author identifiers, which is viewed by some as a limitation in terms of comprehensive evaluation of an individual's publication activity and related metrics ( 11 ). In 2008, Thomson Reuters launched ResearcherID as a multidisciplinary service, which was integrated with the Web of Science platform. The website was specifically designed to disambiguate authors by creating unique profiling web pages and showcasing individual scholars' publications and citations from Web of Science.

The authors with access to Web of Science can create the ResearcherID profile, present and regularly update their biographic notes and indexed articles, track citations and h-index values, provide links to their ORCID IDs, and find collaborators. Although this profiling system does not provide comprehensive coverage of all authors with Web of Science-indexed items, it is often employed for distinguishing the most prolific and influential researchers globally ( 12 ).

Despite the fact that there are more than 270,000 registered IDs on Web of Science ( 13 ), their distribution is disproportionate across academic disciplines and countries, and quantitative comparisons with other profiling systems are not in favor of ResearcherID. In fact, an analysis of 4,307 Norwegian researchers' profiles revealed that ResearcherID was the least popular platform, with only 130 ID holders (3%) ( 14 ). The same study reported that there were 1,307 scholars with ResearchGate (30%) and 333 with Google Scholar (8%) profiles.

In contrast to the Scopus identification system, ResearcherID relies exclusively on the authors' self-identification ( 15 ), which may create inaccuracies and errors in their publication lists by aggregating non-indexed and other authors' Web of Science-indexed items. Finally, concerns have been raised that the ResearcherID platform, which was initially designed for individuals, is now abused and filled with numerous ‘predatory’ journal profiles. Such profiles are created to mislead the readership and claim that these journals are visible on Web of Science ( 16 ).

PubMed does not issue unique author identifiers, but biomedical and allied specialists often rely on this free and rapidly updated platform for literature searches and evaluations of individual profiles linked to MEDLINE-indexed and PubMed Central-archived articles ( 17 ). It is rightly credited as the primary research tool for biomedical specialists ( 18 ).

The accuracy of profiling on PubMed depends on the use of correct author names and their affiliations. Manual corrections of the retrieved records are sometimes required ( 19 ).

The main advantage of the PubMed/MEDLINE profile is its integration with the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) specialist keywords vocabulary and scientific prestige of the indexed items ( 17 ).

Importantly, a web server called Peer2ref is designed to pick expert reviewers and editors by evaluating profiles of authors with MEDLINE-indexed articles ( 20 ). More than 3,800 MEDLINE-indexed journals in the last ten years are searched through for the profiling. The programme automatically evaluates and disambiguates profiles by analysing authors' bibliographies, co-authors, and keywords in their MEDLINE abstracts.

An important recent development for name disambiguation in PubMed was its integration with ORCID, enabling the transfer of bibliographic records from PubMed Central to ORCID IDs ( 21 ).

Researchers who apply for or receive grants from the US National Institutes of Health can now create their Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae (SciENcv) profile, which is a service of The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) ( 22 ). This service is available to all researchers who hold personal accounts at NCBI. The SciENcv service is also compliant with ORCID ( 23 ). It allows them to showcase their research and academic accomplishments, previous grants, awards, and bibliographies.

Google Scholar Citations

Google Scholar Citations was launched in 2012 as a free online platform, and was viewed by some as an alternative to other global citation-tracking services ( 24 ). It now functions as a basic tool for promoting authors from any scholarly discipline with at least one published item in an indexed journal, book, conference proceedings, and non-reviewed sources, which are tracked by Google. The authors with a few or no indexed articles, poorly visible on Scopus and Web of Science, and particularly those from the Social Sciences and Humanities, can benefit from managing their Google Scholar Citations profile. Such a profile is also useful for promoting early career researchers and preserving information about eminent and deceased scholars.

The author profiles can be filled with photographs, links to similar profiles of co-authors, manually added or retrieved from Google articles, books, dissertations, presentations, and any other published items. Citations to these items, which are processed for calculating the individuals' h-index, are also collected from a wide variety of automatically identifiable sources. Evidence from the field of information science suggests that article downloads and captures (bookmarkings) increase Google Scholar Citations ( 25 ).

The lack of filtering poor quality and irrelevant items and the absence of an organized thesaurus for systematizing searches are the main limitations of Google Scholar. The platform is not protected from manipulations and citation boosting by uploading apparently fake citing sources on the Internet ( 26 ). It is also filled with articles from numerous ‘predatory’ journals, polluting science and damaging reputation of Google Scholar as a reliable source for evaluating research performance ( 27 ). At the same time, attempts have been made to introduce validation tools for improving the reliability of the Google Scholar Citations profiles ( 28 ).

ResearchGate

ResearchGate is one of the largest social networking sites for researchers with more than 4.5 million registered users ( 29 ). It was launched in 2008 as a multidisciplinary hub of researchers, a platform for sharing articles and interacting with potential collaborators, and a scholarly discussion forum.

To create the profile page, a researcher should have at least one publication, which is identifiable by the system, or an email account from a recognized institution. Other tools have also been introduced to create verifiable profiles. The ResearchGate profiles incorporate photographs, keywords of professional interests, links to published articles, and other scholarly items. The users can follow publication activity of other registered researchers, send online messages, discuss research issues, and get notifications when their articles are viewed, downloaded, or cited.

The website's functionality is similar to that of other profiling and social networking services, such as Academia.edu, Google Scholar, Facebook, and LinkedIn. However, ResearchGate is primarily designed for scholarly communication and data sharing between researchers, authors, and journal editors ( 30 ). It also stands out of numerous networking sites by archiving full-texts of pre-published and published items in line with the copyrights ( 31 ).

A study revealed that ResearchGate and Google Scholar cover almost the same scholarly items. However, early archiving of pre-published articles on ResearchGate increases their visibility and chances of getting cited ( 32 ). There is also evidence suggesting that readers who view articles on ResearchGate tend to cite them in their Scopus-indexed articles ( 33 ).

The platform tracks citations along with alternative metrics to calculate the ResearchGate Score, which is proved a reliable measure of individual research performance comparable to that of Scopus-based metrics ( 34 ).

Along with the advantages, ResearchGate has also limitations due to the lack of validation tools for preventing archiving of non-reviewed and ‘predatory’ items ( 32 , 35 ). Copyright violations are also common due to users' lack of awareness of the publishers' open archiving regulations. An analysis of randomly selected full-texts of 500 articles, which were posted on ResearchGate, demonstrated that only 108 (21.6%) of these items were from open access journals ( 36 ). The same study demonstrated that 201 (51.3%) of 392 non-open-access items were not eligible for posting on ResearchGate, and in most cases it was possible to avoid the copyright violations by repositing pre-published manuscripts instead of published PDF versions of articles. Finally, concerns have also been raised over the abuses of ResearchGate, leading to cyber-bulling and breaches of privacy ( 37 ).

Academia.edu

About 11 million users have accounts on Academia.edu ( 29 ). This website shares some features with ResearchGate ( 38 ). However, Academia.edu is more tailored to the academic needs. It generates personalized lists of recommended references for its users, saving time for related literature searches ( 39 ). Although Academia.edu is a multidisciplinary hub, one study found that linguists and sociologists keen to preferentially use this website for profiling in their field of professional interests ( 40 ). Based on an analysis of a sample of 31,216 articles, it was found that an article posted on Academia.edu attracts 69% more citations after 5 years than a comparable article not available online ( 41 ). Widely known limitations of this website are related to inappropriate use of its domain name (edu) and scarce tools for the quality scholarly communication.

Researchers who wish to interact and cooperate with their colleagues worldwide, and especially those at early stages of their career, should correctly and consistently list their names in all publications. Creating a unique digital identifier is critically important for them and for authors with common, identical, and variably recorded names ( 42 ). Getting an ORCID identifier allows recording variably listed or common names under a unique digital link and overcoming the author name ambiguity.

Launched in 2012, the ORCID initiative is now the main multidisciplinary hub of researchers, authors, reviewers, mentors, and other academic contributors with permanent identifiers ( 43 ). The number of registered ORCID account holders has grown rapidly over the past 5 years and reached 3,742,608 (as of August 21, 2017). Many leading publishing houses, grant funding agencies, and libraries have endorsed this initiative and provided funding for its development ( 44 ).

The ORCID profiles can be filled with manually added or transferred from CrossRef, Scopus, ResearcherID (Web of Science), Europe PubMed Central, KoreaMed, and other online platforms records of published journal articles, book chapters, and dissertations. Unpublished scholarly works can also be presented on the users' profiles to share preliminary research data. Additionally, the account holders can populate their ORCID profiles with links to their presentations, datasets, images, video files on Figshare, and automatically feed their integrated profiles on ScienceOpen for promoting research and attracting post-publication comments ( 45 , 46 , 47 ). Finally, scholars with Publons accounts acquire a peer review section on their ORCID profiles to fill it with exported information about verified reviewer assignments ( 48 ).

The list of keywords and biographical sketches at the ORCID interface can be edited by the account holders to highlight their scope of professional interests and main achievements, which are required for grant applications, academic promotions, and research collaborations. The ORCID platform has also tools to secure privacy of the users.

Despite its advantages in terms of openness, increased visibility for early career researchers and experts from developing countries, improved management of grant applications and journal submissions, there are some limitations of the system. Approximately 20% of the registered ORCID accounts are now inactive ( 49 ). Some of the scholarly works listed on the users' profiles are poorly validated and apparently incorrect ( 44 ). Although enormous efforts have been made to cover a large number of researchers and contributors, roughly only 10% of the world's researchers are currently represented on the ORCID platform, their distribution across countries is not proportional, and not all research funding agencies and academic institutions mandate opening and maintaining ORCID IDs ( 50 ). Concerns have also been raised over the eventual monopolization of the scholarly communication through the digital identifiers ( 49 ).

A more specialized approach to evaluating academic activities is offered by Publons, which is an increasingly reputable platform for peer reviewers. It was recently acquired by Clarivate Analytics, recognizing this platform as an essential tool for evaluating research performance ( 51 ). Publons also partners with the ScholarOne editorial management system to aid editors in evaluating potential reviewers ( 52 ).

This initiative was launched in 2013 to freely register and credit reviewer and editorial contributions, and rapidly became the only online platform for crediting reviewers and allowing them to claim publication activity by getting digital identifiers from CrossRef for the best reviewer comments ( 53 ).

Unique Publons identifiers are issued to all registered users, who may fill their profiles with photographs and biographic notes, list journals assigning them reviewer and editorial duties, integrate with their ORCID IDs and other academic profiles, and transfer their reviewer comments for open access with the publishers' permission ( 54 ). Publons supports all models of peer review, ranging from double-blind to post-publication review, and is compliant with their users' privacy requirements in terms of listing any reviewer and editorial assignments ( 55 ).

A recent study comparing research performance on Google Scholar and Publons demonstrated that the latter serves a unique purpose, allowing journal editors to pick the best reviewers for future services regardless of their author activities tracked by Google ( 56 ).

Publishers endorsing the initiative and allowing their reviewers to record related information on Publons increase not only the reviewers' but also their own visibility. This is why some non-Anglophone publishers have also joined the initiative and encouraged their contributors to showcase their reviewer and editorial accomplishments on Publons ( 57 ).

DIFFERENCES IN THE USE OF SCHOLARLY PROFILES

For comprehensive evaluation of any individual research profile, no single bibliographic database or scholarly networking platform is currently sufficient. In fact, empiric analyses of information scientists' profiles on Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, specialist databases, and social networking websites revealed that each of these services covered less than 50% of the authors' publication activity ( 58 ).

An analysis of 6,132 profiles on Google Scholar, Academia.edu, ResearchGate, and Mendeley demonstrated that specialists in the Social Sciences and Humanities mostly rely on Academia.edu while biologists prefer ResearchGate for scholarly networking ( 59 ). A survey of 296 faculty members of one of the major New York research and academic institutions pointed to a surprisingly low awareness of the author identifiers among them (n = 95, 32%), with physicists, biologists, and health scientists being relatively better informed than other specialists and mathematicians, who were least informed ( 60 ). The surveyed faculty members mostly used ORCID IDs (n = 49, 15%), followed by Scopus author ID (n = 29, 9%), ResearcherID (n = 25, 7%), and arXiv ID (n = 20, 6%).

The use of online profiles differs substantially across countries. Scholars from Brazil and India are well represented on ResearchGate while their Chinese, Russian, and Korean colleagues rarely use this platform for showcasing their publication activity and interacting with potential collaborators ( 37 , 61 ).

Functionalities and content coverage of scholarly networking and profiling websites also differ substantially. ResearchGate predominantly archives recent articles of the profile holders while historic papers remain poorly visible on this platform, and particularly in the Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities ( 62 ). A recent analysis of search, navigation, analytics, privacy, filtering, and other features of ResearchGate, Academia.edu, Mendeley, and Zotero proved that none of these services has advanced operational functions ( 63 ). The same study scored ‘above average’ and ranked first ResearchGate based on an analysis of its information retrieval and management functions.

PERSPECTIVES OF PROFILING INDIVIDUAL SCHOLARS

Online researcher and author profile is a recognized tool for self-promotion, scholarly networking, sharing publications, and making an impact ( 64 , 65 ). Global visibility of research output and availability of complementary platforms for aggregating massive volumes of scholarly items and tracking citations and alternative metrics add to the research management and ranking of scholars. Advanced searches through ResearchGate and Academia.edu are increasingly employed for systematic analyses of literature, and particularly in non-mainstream science countries ( 66 , 67 , 68 ).

Authors are now able to monitor daily interest of the global scientific community toward publications posted on their Google Scholar and ResearchGate profiles ( 69 ). Many other networking platforms are upgraded to accommodate digital profiles (resumes) for academic, research, or business purposes ( 70 ). All these developments suggest that profiling is there to stay.

Additionally, there are some national platforms, which are prioritized for profiling scholars in non-Anglophone countries (e.g., the Index Copernicus Scientists panel, the Science Index platform of the Russian Science Citation Index database). Although these websites promote publications of the account holders locally, their coverage and global visibility are still limited due to the language barrier and skewed impact metrics. The latter is a particularly big issue for the Index Copernicus database, which has been criticized for indexing numerous ‘predatory’ journals and issuing questionable metrics ( 71 ).

New dimensions for profiling emerge to increase visibility and scholarly reputation of researchers at any stage of their career. The ScienceOpen platform with its unique model of profiling, open-access publishing, and post-publication commenting is a good example of the close relationship between online profiling and publishing ( 46 ). Kudos, a powerful toolkit for authors, is yet another innovative option for strengthening scholarly reputation and comprehensively measuring the impact of publications. This service is integrated with the Web of Science citation tracking and ScholarOne and Aries editorial management systems. Kudos allows sharing links to articles of the profile holders through social media and scholarly networks, thus increasing chances of their use ( 72 ). A recent study showed that authors discussing and sharing their articles via Kudos increase downloads of these items by 23% ( 73 ).

But advances in the digitization and social networking have also created challenges, which will prevail and grow in the coming years. Paradoxically, one of the pressing issues is the wide variety of online platforms offering diverse services for setting individual accounts. Not all researchers embrace the advantages of the available platforms and some of them question the quality and credibility of information provided on social networking channels ( 39 ). On the other hand, it is difficult for the individual researcher to discern the advantages and disadvantages of each platform, and continuing proliferation of such platforms is likely to make this problem even worse. There is a real risk that early career researchers aiming to enhance their profile and optimize their visibility may spend more time updating their profile in multiple networking platforms than continuing to be academically productive. Research and academic institutions, in turn, fail to incorporate relevant topics in the process of education and make online profiling mandatory. In the wake of proliferation of profiling platforms, ORCID is perhaps the only universal option which can become mandatory for early career researchers and senior scholars alike.

Research managers, journal editors, and publishers are in their position to make the use of reliable profiling platforms mandatory for ranking scholars. Given the preferential use of some websites for profiling authors in certain disciplines (e.g., PubMed for medicine, Academia.edu for social sciences and humanities), a combined approach can be viewed as an optimal solution ( Table 2 ).

With the increasing use of various online tools for research, it is likely that new complementary profiling platforms will be offered and established ones will be upgraded to meet the growing needs of interdisciplinary research and scholarly publishing. It is much desirable to strengthen the complementarity (“cross-talk”) of profiling platforms so that one could easily update, secure, validate, and populate each of them with information from a single source.

DISCLOSURE: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any institution.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION: Conceptualization: Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Endovitskiy DA, Kitas GD. Methodology: Gasparyan AY, Nurmashev B, Yessirkepov M, Voronov AA. Writing - original draft: Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Kitas GD. Writing - review & editing: Gasparyan AY, Nurmashev B, Yessirkepov M, Endovitskiy DA, Voronov AA, Kitas GD.

Profi Online Research : Earn $ 15 or more

Published by admin on may 17, 2013 may 17, 2013, get paid for your opinions with profi online research.

Profi Online Research ™ – the first specialized company in the Russian market, which is designed to conduct high-quality marketing research using advanced technologies. By registering with Profi Online Research, you will occasionally receive invitations to participate in surveys matching your profile. You can fill out a form at your convenience.

As we all knows, paid survey work is one of the easiest ways to earn money is by signing up for survey sites that offer rewards in cash or gift vouchers or any other mode for participating in paid survey questionnaires.

MAXIMIZE YOUR SURVEY EARNINGS

How much money can you make taking surveys with profi online research.

You can easily make an extra $15-$50 per month or more by joining Profi Online Research Survey Panel. Your survey earning could be $500 or more if you use more survey sites and strategies as we have mentioned in our tips and tricks articles. Online Paid Survey Job is an interesting work, and one you can do in your free time and from the comfort of your own home.

Now you can understand that you’re not going to earn a big amount of money by joining only Profi Online Research Survey Panel. But if you are serious to take a good number of surveys each month then you should need to join more survey panels as much as you can, and with this you will able to make some extra money for your needs, for paying off debt, or for investing. 

Before getting started you should need to get in touched or learn few basic things about paid surveys like, what the best survey panels are available right now, with ease how to earn with them, and most importantly you may read some tips and tricks that will help you to make enthusiast and alert you to get avoiding scams or spams.

QUICK STATS OF PROFI ONLINE RESEARCH

The amount of money you will be credited to your account immediately upon completion of filling the form. Payments are made regularly, and the accumulation in your account the amount of $ 15 or more .

The regularity of payments you can customize your personal account.  

Eligibility :

Anyone 13 years of age or older can participate and earn rewards! Open for worldwide panelists.

The cost of the study depends on the complexity of questions asked, and of their number. Reward for a completed application form can be from 0.5 to 15 dollars.

How many times do I register?

Sign up for their system can be only one time. In identifying the facts of double registrations, all of your profiles, except that which was originally designed to be removed.

Joining Fees :

There is no charge for participation. They pay you!

How to join :

All you need to do – register on their site. To do this, fill out a special form, which you can find here  .   Note : to read all information in English on Profi Online Research Portal, use Google translate.

Related Posts

Donate Your Opinion

Life points panel pays 10 virtual points as welcome bonus, they’ll give you 10 virtual points (lps) as a welcome bonus to kick off your earnings..

Join View Point Panel and earn up to $5 per survey via PayPal

Viewpointpanel is the leader in paid online surveys and has rewarded our survey participants over $30000000 since the program began in 2009., american online paid survey panels, pinecone research panel pay $3 for every survey, as an active member, you will able to earn points for every completed survey. which are redeemable for cash or prizes..

• CRM Software
• Email Marketing Software
• Help Desk Software
• Human Resource Software
• Project Management Software
• Browse All Categories
• Accounting Firms
• Digital Marketing Agencies
• Advertising Agencies
• SEO Companies
• Web Design Companies
• Blog & Research

Reviews of Profi

Capterra’s researchers use a mix of verified reviews, independent research and objective methodologies to bring you selection and ranking information you can trust. While we may earn a referral fee when you visit a provider through our links or speak to an advisor, this has no influence on our research or methodology.  

Capterra carefully verified over 2 million reviews to bring you authentic software and services experiences from real users. Our human moderators verify that reviewers are real people and that reviews are authentic. They use leading tech to analyze text quality and to detect plagiarism and generative AI.   Learn more.

Capterra lists all providers across its website—not just those that pay us—so that users can make informed purchase decisions. Capterra is free for users. Software and service providers pay us for sponsored profiles to receive web traffic and sales opportunities. Sponsored profiles include a link-out icon that takes users to the provider’s website.   Learn more.

Our organization has had a great experience with Profi. The onboarding process went very smoothly and Andrew was helpful with helping us understand how to navigate the system.

Profi was really quick and easy to set up (calendar, services, clients, forms, landing page ...). It has a beautiful, clean interface and is a pleasure to use every day.

There are just so many great polished features in Profi. This is one of my best purchases in the past 10 years.

It works beautifully, everyone is super helpful and very easy to reach, and there are always new features, updates, improvements, and so much engagement to help.

Unable to reorder questions on forms. No where for me to store forms I need to fill out for clients.

I need a group coaching sessions option in programs - there are workarounds, but those create unnecessary booking process complications for our clients, which isn't ideal.

The only thing i dont like is getting an email every time someone signs up. This can be annoying when you have hundreds sign up in one day.

In a service page if I add a button to open an external link. The button doesn't work well.

Showing Most Helpful

Showing 25 of 57 reviews

Vendor Response

Easily find vetted research participants and AI taskers at scale

An unrivaled participant pool.

Your data is only as good as the people behind it. Our pool has 200,000+ active participants who are fully vetted and verified, so you know they’re real, unique, and AI-free.

Data quality you can depend on.

Our algorithms continuously monitor and manage the pool with 25 different checks so the quality of responses stays high. Participants are properly rewarded and highly engaged so you get rich, accurate, and comprehensive responses.

Regular manual and algorithmic quality checks.

200k+ active, reliable, and engaged participants., rich, reliable, and comprehensive responses..

Start quickly – and scale fast.

Our platform is self-serve and designed for ease of use. Move effortlessly from one-off or niche panels, to fully automated AI training at scale – powered by our API.

Start now and see results in minutes

Run academic research with confidence, get high-quality human-powered data for ai.

Develop products based on the best possible data

Quickly scale market research
with our easy-to-learn platform, contribute to world‑changing research..

Take control with your favorite tools

Find, filter, and re-use the right participants.

Find the right participants from the start. Use our 300+ filters to create custom, diverse or representative groups from our large, diverse pool. Once they’ve responded, you can message, group, and re-target them again.

Create rich, balanced, and bias-free datasets.

Select representative samples in the us and uk..

Flexible study design – with advanced support

Prolific allows for highly flexible project design, with support for text, imagery, voice, or interaction. This support projects ranging from A/B tests to recurring, time-sensitive, and multi-part projects; or multi-modal AI learning.

We’re making diverse, high-quality data available to anyone, anywhere.

Prolific was created by researchers, for researchers. Our rigorous and ethical approach means we deliver higher data quality for online behavioural research than all our competitors.

Trusted for 10 years by leading academics, researchers, and organizations

I'd recommend Prolific to anyone looking to quickly gather high-quality data, especially if they need to recruit specific kinds of participant. I honestly don't think my research would have been possible without Prolific.

Most amazon mechanical turk workers might respond with a comma-delaminated list of like four words. prolific participants were writing in full sentences and fully describing things. it just makes for much more impactful work., prolific has helped us obtain high-quality feedback from native speakers in a targeted, efficient and ethical manner. prolific has formed the backbone of our research evaluation framework, helping us provide metrics to demonstrate the success of our research both in international conference publications as well as for internal reporting., put prolific to the test. today..

Getting started is simple. With no contract or subscription – just a transparent service fee for each completed response.

Get started in 15 minutes

Want to know more.

If you are a research participant or have questions about becoming one, please visit our participants page.

High-quality human data to deliver world-leading research and AIs.

Follow us on

All Rights Reserved Prolific 2024

Start growing your service business with Profi