Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

Research on Education and Media

2 Issues per year

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2037-0830
See all formats and pricing
In This Section

Academic Social Networks: How the web is changing our way to make and communicate researches

Giovanni Bonaiuti
  • University of Cagliari, Italy
  • Email:
Published Online: 2016-02-19 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/rem-2015-0010

Abstract

Networking is not only essential for success in academia, but it should also be seen as a natural component of the scholarly profession. Research is typically not a purely individualistic enterprise. Academic social network sites give researchers the ability to publicise their research outputs and connect with each other. This work aims to investigate the use done by Italian scholars of 11/D2 scientific field. The picture presented shows a realistic insight into the Italian situation, although since the phenomenon is in rapid evolution results are not stable and generalizable.

Keywords: Academic social network sites; Research strategies; Altmetrics; Scholars visibility

References

  • Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, Chris. (2009). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

  • Baynes, G. (2012). Key Issue - Scientometrics, bibliometrics, altmetrics: some introductory advice for the lost and bemused. Insights: The UKSG Journal, 25(3), 311-315. http://doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.25.3.311 [Crossref]

  • Beall, J. (2012). Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature, 489(7415), 179-179. http://doi.org/10.1038/489179a [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Beech, M. (2014). Key Issue How to share and discuss your research successfully online. Insights: The UKSG Journal, 27(1), 92-95. http://doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.142 [Crossref]

  • Bik, H. M., & Goldstein, M. C. (2013). An Introduction to Social Media for Scientists. PLoS Biology, 11(4). doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001535 [Crossref] [Web of Science]

  • Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2014). Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Eprint arxiv:1402.4578. Retrieved from arXiv

  • Brenner, J., & Smith, A. (2013). 72 % of Online Adults are Social Networking Site Users groups continue to increase their engagement. Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/files/oldmedia//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Social_networking_sites_update_PDF.pdf

  • Bullinger, A. C., Hallerstede, S. H., Renken, U., Söldner, J.-H., & Möslein, K. M. (2010). Towards Research Collaboration - a Taxonomy of Social Research Network Sites. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Lima, Peru, August 12-15, 2010 (pp. 1-9). Lima, Peru.

  • Falagas M.E., Pitsouni E.I., Malietzis G.A., & Pappas G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal, 22(2), pp. 338-42. [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Galligan, F., & Dyas-Correia, S. (2013). Altmetrics: Rethinking the Way We Measure. Serials Review, 39(1), 56-61. doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2013.01.003 [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Greenhow, C., & Gleason, B. (2014). Social scholarship: Reconsidering scholarly practices in the age of social media. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 392-402. [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Haglund, L., & Olsson, P. (2008). The impact on university libraries of changes in information behavior among academic researchers: A multiple case study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 52-59. [Crossref] [Web of Science]

  • Haines, L. L., Light, J., O’Malley, D., & Delwiche, F. a. (2010). Information-seeking behavior of basic science researchers: implications for library services. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 98(1), 73-81. http://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.98.1.019 [Crossref]

  • Happell, B., & Cleary, M. (2013). Research career development: The importance of establishing a solid track record in nursing academia. Collegian, 21(3), 233-238. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2013.04.005 [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Hoffmann, C. P., Lutz, C., & Meckel, M. (2014). Impact Factor 2.0: Applying Social Network Analysis to Scientific Impact Assessment. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1576-1586). doi:10.1109/HICSS.2014.202

  • Hugget, S. (2010). Social networking in academia. Research Trends, 16(March), 5-6.

  • Hugget, S. (2010). Social networking in academia. Research Trends, 16(March), 5-6.

  • Jordan, K. (2014). Academics and their online networks: Exploring the role of academic social networking sites. First Monday, 19(11), 1-19.

  • Kinal, J., & Rykiel, Z. (2013). Open Access as a Factor of Enhancing of the Global Information Flow. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83, 156-160. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.030 [Crossref]

  • Kortelainen, T., & Katvala, M. (2012). “ Everything is plentiful-Except attention” Attention data of scientific journals on social web tools. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 661-668. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.06.004 [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Labrie, N., Amati, R., Camerini, A.-L., Zampa, M., & Zanini, C. (2015). “What’s in it for us?” Six dyadic networking strategies in academia. Studies in Communication Sciences, 15(1), 158-160. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scoms.2015.03.012 [Crossref]

  • Li, N., & Gillet, D. (2013). Identifying influential scholars in academic social media platforms. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining - ASONAM ’13 (pp. 608-614). Niagara, Ontario, CAN: ACM. doi:10.1145/2492517.2492614 [Crossref]

  • Liu, J., & Adie, E. (2013). New perspectives on article-level metrics: developing ways to assess research uptake and impact online. Insights the UKSG Journal, 26(July), 153-158. doi:10.1629/2048-7754.79 [Crossref]

  • Lupton, D. (2014). ‘Feeling Better Connected’: Academics’ Use of Social Media. Canberra: News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra.

  • Mabe, M. A. (2010). Scholarly Communication: A Long View. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16(sup1), 132-144. doi:10.1080/13614533.2010.512242 [Crossref]

  • Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2014). I Social Media vanno all’università? Un’indagine sulle pratiche didattiche degli accademici italiani. ECPS - Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies, (10), 305-339. doi:10.7358/ecps-2014-010-manc [Crossref]

  • Marino, W. (2012). Fore-cite: tactics for evaluating citation management tools. Reference Services Review, 40(2), 295-310. http://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211228336 [Crossref]

  • Menendez, M., De Angeli, A., & Menestrina, Z. (2012). Exploring the virtual space of academia. In From Research to Practice in the Design of Cooperative Systems: Results and Open Challenges. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems, COOP 2012 (pp. 49-63). Marseille, France. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-4093-1_4 [Crossref]

  • Moed, H.F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. New York: Springer Mohammadi, E., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(8), 1627-1638. doi:10.1002/asi.23071 [Crossref]

  • Niu, X., Hemminger, B. M., Lown, C., Adams, S., Brown, C., Level, A., … Cataldo, T. (2010). National study of information seeking behavior of academic researchers in the United States. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(5), 869-890. http://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21307 [Web of Science] [Crossref]

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

  • Ovadia, S. (2014). ResearchGate and Academia.edu : Academic Social Networks. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 33(3), 165-16941. http://doi.org/10.1080/01639269.2014.934093 [Crossref]

  • Powell, D. a., Jacob, C. J., & Chapman, B. J. (2012). Using Blogs and New Media in Academic Practice: Potential Roles in Research, Teaching, Learning, and Extension. Innovative Higher Education, 37(4), 271-282. doi:10.1007/s10755-011-9207-7 [Crossref]

  • Ranieri, M., Manca, S., & Fini, A. (2012). Why (and how) do teachers engage in social networks? An exploratory study of professional use of Facebook and its implications for lifelong learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(5), 754-769. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01356.x Salem, J., & Fehrmann, P. (2013). Bibliographic Management Software : A Focus Group Study of the Preferences and Practices of Undergraduate Students Bibliographic Management Software : A Focus Group Study of the Preferences and Practices of Undergraduate Students. Public Services Quarterly, 9(October), 110-120. http://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2013.785878 [Crossref] [Web of Science]

  • Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 434-445. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.002 [Crossref]

  • Tapscott D., Williams A. D. (2007). Wikinomics 2.0: La collaborazione di massa che sta cambiando il mondo, Milano: Etas Libri.

  • Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2014). Academia.edu: Social network or academic network. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 721-731. doi:10.1002/asi.23038 [Crossref]

  • Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring Scholarship? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 876-889. doi:10.1002/asi.23236 [Crossref]

  • Van Eperen, L., & Marincola, F. M. (2011). How scientists use social media to communicate their research. Journal of Translational Medicine, 9(1), 199. doi:10.1186/1479-5876-9-199 [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Walters W.H. (2011). Comparative Recall and Precision of Simple and Expert Searches in Google Scholar and Eight Other Databases. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 11(4), pp. 971-1006.

  • Weller, M. (2011). The Digital Scholar. How technology is transforming scholarly practice. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Yang, S., Qiu, J., & Xiong, Z. (2010). An empirical study on the utilization of web academic resources in humanities and social sciences based on web citations. Scientometrics, 84(1), 1-19. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0142-7 [Crossref] [Web of Science]

  • Zhang, Y. (2012). Comparison of Select Reference Management Tools. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 31(1), 45-60. http://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2012.641841 [Crossref]

About the article

Published Online: 2016-02-19

Published in Print: 2015-12-01



Citation Information: Research on Education and Media, ISSN (Online) 2037-0830, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/rem-2015-0010. Export Citation

© 2016. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in