Contributes

Who is interacting with researchers on Twitter? A survey in the field of Information Science


Abstract


The social web appears a promising environment to study the societal impact of research, and, although platforms such as Twitter appear to be popular to share scientific content, little is known about the outreach of scientific communication on social media. By surveying a sample of Twitter users who are also followers of communication and Library and Information Science (LIS) researchers, this article aims to understand who is interacting with researchers on Twitter and if the activity of following allows to get closer to science and research. A survey was sent to all followers of 9 active researchers, and 53 responses were collected and analyzed. According to the results, followers are mostly professionals (49%) although the higher education sector (36%) accounts for an important part of the audience. Twitter allows respondents to keep updated, feel as a part of the scientific community and gain more visibility, whereas interactions appear as an important though secondary facet of these users’ activity on Twitter. Finally, participants consider that they do not have influence on the scientific process, maybe because the flow of information on Twitter occurs mostly as retweeting in an unidirectional fashion. More research is needed in order to understand better interactions and engagement on social media before they can be quantified and measured as indicators of societal impact of research.


Keywords


Altmetrics; Societal Impact of Research; Communication; Library and Information Science; Twitter; Social Media Interactions.

Full Text:

TEXT


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-12530

References


Alperin, Juan Pablo, Charles J. Gomez, and Stefanie Haustein. 2018. “Identifying diffusion patterns of research articles on Twitter: A case study of online engagement with open access articles”. Public Understanding of Science, 0963662518761733.

Álvarez-Bornstein, Belén and Michela Montesi. 2016. “La comunicación entre investigadores en Twitter. Una etnografía virtual en el ámbito de las ciencias de la documentación”. Revista Española de Documentación Cientifìca 39, 4:e156. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1352.

Archie, Kelli M., Lisa Dilling, Jana B. Milford, and Fred C. Pampel. 2014. “Unpacking the ‘information barrier’: Comparing perspectives on information as a barrier to climate change adaptation in the interior mountain West”. Journal of Environmental Management 133:397−410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.12.015.

Bombaci, Sara P., Cooper M. Farr, H. Travis Gallo, Anna M. Mangan, Lani T. Stinson, Monica Kaushik, and Liba Pejchar. 2016. “Using Twitter to communicate conservation science from a professional conference”. Conservation Biology 30, 1:216−225. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12570.

Bornmann, Lutz. 2012. “Measuring the societal impact of research”. EMBO Reports 13, 8:673−676. Doi: 10.1038/embor.2012.99.

Bornmann, Lutz. 2013. “What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey”. Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology 64, 2:217−233. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22803.

Bornmann, Lutz. 2014. “Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics”. Journal of Informetrics 8, 4:895−903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.005.

Bornmann, Lutz. 2015. “Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics”. Scientometrics 103, 3:1123−1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1565-y.

Bornmann, Lutz. 2015a. “Usefulness of altmetrics for measuring the broader impact of research: A case study using data from PLOS and F1000Prime”. Aslib Journal of Information Management 67, 3:305−319. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2014-0115.

Bornmann, Lutz, Robin Haunschild, and Jonathan Adams. 2018. “Convergent validity of altmetrics and case studies for assessing societal impact: an analysis based on UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) data.” In Proceedings of Science & Technology Indicators (STI), September 12-14, Leiden, 41−48.

Boyd, Danah, Scott Golder, and Gilad Lotan. 2010. “Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter.” 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Budge, Kylie, Narelle Lemon and Megan McPherson. 2016. “Academics who tweet: ‘messy’ identities in academia”. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 8, 2:210−221. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-11-2014-0114.

Carpenter, Jeffrey P., and Daniel G. Krutka. 2014. “How and why educators use Twitter: A survey of the field”. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 46, 4:414−434.

Case, Donald O., and Lisa M. Given (eds.). 2016. Looking for information. A survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Chikoore, Lesley, Steve Probets, Jenny Fry, and Claire Creaser. 2016. “How are UK academics engaging the public with their research? A cross-disciplinary perspective”. Higher Education Quarterly 70, 2:145−169. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12088.

Clapton, Janet. 2010. “Library and information science practitioners writing for publication: motivations, barriers and supports”. Library and Information Research 34 106:7−21.

Darling, Emily S., David Shiffman, Isabelle M. Cote, and Joshua A. Drew. 2013. “The role of Twitter in the life cycle of a scientific presentation”. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution 6:32–43.

De Jong, Stefan, Katharine Barker, Deborah Cox, Thordis Sveinsdottir, and Peter Van den Besselaar. 2014. “Understanding societal impact through productive interactions: ICT research as a case”. Research Evaluation 23, 2:89−102. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu001.

Dilling, Lisa, and María Carmen Lemos. 2011. “Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy”. Global environmental change 21, 2:680−689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.006.

Draucker, Fawn. 2015. “Participation structures in Twitter interaction: Arguing for the broadcaster role”, in Participation in Public and Social Media Interactions, edited by Marta Dynel and Jan Chovanec. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company, 49−66. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.256.03dra.

Greenhalgh, Trisha, James Raftery, Steve Hanney, and Matthew Glover. 2016. “Research impact: a narrative review”. BMC Medicine 14, 1. Doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0620-8.

Gruzd, Anatoliy, Barry Wellman and Yuri Takhteyev. 2011. “Imagining Twitter as an imagined community”. American Behavioral Scientist 55, 10:1294−1318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211409378.

Haustein, Stefanie. 2016. “Grand challenges in altmetrics: heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies”. Scientometrics 108, 1:413−423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1910-9.

Haustein, Stefanie, and Rodrigo Costas. 2015. “Identifying Twitter audiences: who is tweeting about scientific papers?” ASIS&T SIG/MET Metrics 2015 Workshop, available at: https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/sigmet2015_paper_11.pdf.

Haustein, Stefanie, Timothy D. Bowman, and Rodrigo Costas. 2015. “Interpreting “altmetrics”: Viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories”. In Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication, edited by Cassidy Sugimoto. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 372−406.

Haustein, Stefanie, Timothy D. Bowman, Kim Holmberg, Isabella Peters, and Vincent Larivière. 2014. “Astrophysicists on Twitter: An in-depth analysis of tweeting and scientific publication behavior”. Aslib Journal of Information Management 66, 3:279−296. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0081.

Haustein, Stefanie, Rodrigo Costas, and Vincent Larivière. 2015. “Characterizing social media metrics of scholarly papers: the effect of document properties and collaboration patterns”. PloS one 10, 3: e0120495. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127830.

Haustein, Stefanie, Isabella Peters, Judit Bar-Ilan, Jason Priem, Hadas Shema, and Jens Terliesner. 2014. “Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community”. Scientometrics 101, 2:1145−1163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1221-3.

Haunschild, Robin, Loet Leydesdorff, Lutz Bornmann, Iina Hellsten and Werner Marx. 2018. “Does the public discuss other topics on climate change than researchers? A comparison of networks based on author keywords and hashtags”. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.07456. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.07456 [Last access 03.01.2019].

Holmberg, Kim. 2015. Altmetrics for Information Professionals: Past, Present and Future. Amsterdam etc.: Chandos Publishing.

Holmberg, Kim., Timothy D.Bowman, Stefanie Haustein, and Isabella Peters. 2014. “Astrophysicists’ Conversational Connections on Twitter”. PloS one 9, 8:e106086. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106086.

Ke, Qing, Yong-Yeol Ahn, Cassidy R. Sugimoto. 2017. “A systematic identification and analysis of scientists on Twitter”. PloS one 12, 4:e0175368.

Jeng, Wei., Daqing He, and Jiepu Jiang. 2015. “User participation in an academic social networking service: A survey of open group users on Mendeley”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66, 5:890−904. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23225.

Marwick, Alice E. 2014. “Ethnographic and Qualitative Research on Twitter.” In Twitter and Society, edited by Katrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Cornelius Puschmann, Jean Burgess, and Merja Mahrt. New York: Peter Lang, 109−122.

Mas-Bleda, Amalia, Mike Thelwall, Kayvan Kousha, and Isidro F. Aguillo. 2014. “Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social web?” Scientometrics 101, 1:337−356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1345-0.

Mohammadi, Ehsan, Mike Thelwall, and Kayvan Kousha. 2018. “Academic information on Twitter: A user survey”. PloS one, 13, 5, e0197265.

Mohammadi, Ehsan, Mike Thelwall, and Kayvan Kousha. 2016. “Can Mendeley bookmarks reflect readership? A survey of user motivations”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67, 5:1198−1209. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23477.

Mohammadi, Ehsan, Mike Thelwall, Stefanie Haustein, and Vincent Larivière. 2015. “Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66, 9:1832−1846. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23286.

Müllerleile, Andreas. 2014. “European Studies and Public Engagement: A Conceptual Toolbox”. Journal of Contemporary European Research 10, 4:505−517.

Na, Jin-Cheon. 2015. “User Motivations for Tweeting Research Articles: A Content Analysis Approach”. In Allen, R.B., Hunter, J., Zeng, M.L. (Eds.), Digital Libraries: Providing Quality Information. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Asia-Pacific Digital Libraries, ICALD, 2015, Seoul, Korea, December 9-12, 197−208.

Ozanne, Julie L., Brennan Davis, Jeff B. Murray, Sonya Grier, Ahmed Benmecheddal, Hilary Downey, et al. 2017. “Assessing the Societal Impact of Research: The Relational Engagement Approach”. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 36, 1:1−14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jppm.14.121.

Pedrini, Matteo, Valentina Langella, Mario A. Battaglia and Paola Zaratin. 2018. “Assessing the health research’s social impact: a systematic review”. Scientometrics 114, 3:1227−1250.

Pickard, Alison. J. 2013. Research methods in information. London: Facet publishing.

Powell, Ronald. R., Lynda M. Baker, and Joseph J. Mika. 2002. “Library and information science practitioners and research”. Library & Information Science Research 24, 1:49−72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-8188(01)00104-9.

Priem, Jason. 2014. “Altmetrics”, in Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact, edited by Blaise Cronin and Cassidy Sugimoto. MIT Press, 263−287.

Priem, Jason, Dario Taraborelli, Paul Groth, and Cameron Neylon. 2010. “Altmetrics: A manifesto”, available at: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/ (last access 1.31.2017).

Quan-Haase, Anabel, Lori McCay-Peet. 2015. “Networks of digital humanities scholars: The informational and social uses and gratifications of Twitter”. Big Data & Society 2, 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2053951715589417.

Spaapen, Jack, and Leonie Van Drooge. 2011. “Introducing ‘productive interactions’ in social impact assessment”. Research Evaluation 20, 3:211−218. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876742.

Sud, Pardeep, and Mike Thelwall. 2014. “Evaluating altmetrics”. Scientometrics 98, 2:1131−1143. Doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-1117-2.

Thelwall, Mike, and Kayvan Kousha. 2015. “Web indicators for research evaluation. Part 2: Social media metrics”. El profesional de la Información 24, 5:607−620. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.sep.09.

Torres-Salinas, Daniel, and Yusnelkis Milanés-Guisado. 2014. “Presencia en redes sociales y altmétricas de los principales autores de la revista El Profesional de la Información”. El Profesional de la Información 23, 4:367−372. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2014.jul.04.

Vaughan, Liwen. 2001. Statistical methods for the information professional: A practical, painless approach to understanding, using, and interpreting statistics. Medford, New jersey: Information Today, Inc.

Veletsianos, G. 2012. “Higher education scholars’ participation and practices on Twitter”. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 28, 4:336−349. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00449.x.

Weinberg, Sharon L., and Sarah k. Abramowitz. 2008. Statistics using SPSS: An integrative approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zuccala, Alesia. 2009. “The lay person and Open Access”. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 43, 1:1−62. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2009.1440430115.


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Belén Álvarez-Bornstein

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Logo Università di FirenzeLogo EUMJLIS.it is a journal of the SAGAS Department, University of Florence, published by EUM, Edizioni Università di Macerata (Italy).

ISSN: 2038-1026

Openaire Logo DOAJ seal