academics and their online networks: exploring the role of academic social networking sites
DESCRIPTION
Jordan, K. (2013) Academics and their online networks: Exploring the role of academic social networking sites. Presentation at the Association for Learning Technology Conference (ALT-C), 11th September 2013, University of Nottingham, UK.TRANSCRIPT
11/09/2013
Katy JordanThe Open [email protected]@katy_jordan
Association for Learning Technology Conference11th September 2013
Academics and their online networksExploring the role of academic social networking sites
Defining academic SNS
“We define social network sites as web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.” (boyd & Ellison, 2007).
0
5000000
10000000
150000000
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
Web rank
Num
ber
of
users
Academia.edu
ResearchGate.net
Mendeley.com
Lallslo.com
Mynetresearch.com
Iamresearcher.com
Academici.com
Affordances of academic SNS
• Identity: Constructing an online academic profile– Almousa, 2011; Menendez, de Angeli & Menestrina, 2012• Communication: Discovery and dissemination of research findings; asking and answering questions.– Veletsianos, 2011• Collaboration: Finding similar or different collaborators; supporting active research relationships.– Jeng et al., 2012; Oh & Jeng, 2011
Research questions
• What is the structure of academic social networks?• To what extent do different academic social networking sites foster similar networks?• Do factors such as discipline or position correlate with behaviour in the network?
Research methods
• Focused upon Open University (OU) academics• Mapped network of connections between OU-affiliated academics on three main academic SNS• Categorised according to position and discipline• Survey carried out on a sub-sample to explore perceptions about role of academic SNS and follow up on differences in network structure based on position and discipline
Visualizing the networks - discipline
Mendeley Academia.edu
Community structure
Historical & Philosophical StudiesEducationBiological SciencesSocial StudiesComputer ScienceBusiness & AdministrationCreative Arts & DesignMedicine relatedPhysical SciencesMathematicsLanguagesLawLinguistics, Classics & relatedEngineering
Connection and position in the network
• Both degree and centrality showed significant differences according to position• More senior academics have a higher degree and occupy a more central position in the network
Undergraduate student
Alumnus
Academic support
Lecturer
Unknown0
10203040
Position
Deg
ree = In degree
☐ = out degree
Survey resultsTheme Item Subject Positio
nActive
Communication – posing and answering questions
Being able to ask questions of the online community is important
Academic SNS allow me to draw upon a wider community of expertise when I need help
Communication – academic publications
Academic SNS are a good way of promoting my own academic publications
Academic SNS are a good way of finding out about new publications of interest
Collaboration – present and future
Academic SNS are a useful way to support working in collaboration with other researchers
Having a profile will enhance my future career prospects
Identity – how academics view the role of profiles
Being part of an academic SNS is useful
My online academic and personal identities are separated
I see my profile as an online business card
I use my profile as a research journal
I actively interact with others via the site
Identity – exploring trends in network structure
I only follow people who I know personally If someone follows me, I follow them back
I follow people who I would like to work with in the future
I follow people as a way of staying in touch with people I used to work with
Conclusions
• Provided an insight into the network structure fostered by academic SNS• Similarities with social network structures in other contexts• Subject area influential on community structure• Seniority influential on position and connectivity of individual nodes
Acknowledgements
• Thanks to my supervisors, Professor Martin Weller and Dr. Canan Blake.• This work was made possible through a doctoral studentship from the Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology at the Open University, UK.• Special thanks to all of the Open University graduate students and academics who took part in the pilot study.
References•Almousa, O. (2011) Users’ classification and usage-pattern identification in academic social networks. Proc. AEECT.•boyd, d.m. & Ellison, N.B. (2007) Social network sites: Definition, history and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 1, article 1.• Jeng, W., He, D., Jiang, J. & Zhang, Y. (2012) Groups in Mendeley: Owners’ descriptions and group outcomes. Proc. ASIST.•Menendez, M., de Angeli, A. & Menestrina, Z. (2012) Chapter 4: Exploring the virtual space of academia. In: J. Dugdale et al. (eds.) From research to practice in the design of cooperative systems. Springer.•Nentwich, M. & Konig, R.(2012) Cyberscience 2.0: Research in the age of digital social networks. Campus Verlag.•Oh, J.S. & Jeng, W. (2011) Groups in academic social networking services: An exploration of their potential as a platform for multi-disciplinary collaboration. Proc. SocialCom.
•Rainie, L. & Wellman, B. (2012) Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge: MIT Press.
•Veletsianos, G. (2011), Higher education scholars' participation and practices on Twitter. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 28(4), 336-349.
•Weller, M. (2011) The Digital Scholar: How technology is transforming scholarly practice. London: Bloomsbury.