Comparative Analysis of Users’ Preferences of Academic Social Networking Sites: From Academic Identity and Discipline Perspectives

Abstract

Abstract: To understanding the behavioral preferences and attitudes of users of academic social networking sites, and to provide an important reference for online scientific communication research and practice, we obtained information on platform usage and attitudes of users of mainstream academic social networking sites through questionnaires, and then conducted statistics and tests on the survey results to analyze the differences in usage behaviors of users with different academic identities and disciplines. This study found that scientific communication behavior of users was significantly related to academic identity, but the disciplinary difference was not obvious. Among them, the faculty group valued online scientific communication more than students, but students were more likely to find publications of interest. Lecturers/assistant lecturers were more willing to seek scientific collaboration and had the highest level of agreement with the platform’s role in facilitating scholarly communication, while professors/associate professors were socially underrepresented. In addition, the platform had a limited role in identifying job opportunities and project funding.

Yan Lingyan (School of Communication, Fujian Normal University) Yang Siluo (School of Information Management, Wuhan University). Comparative Analysis of Users’ Preferences of Academic Social Networking Sites: From Academic Identity and Discipline Perspectives[J]. Libraly Journal, 2022, 41(8): 62-68.

References

[ 1 ] Revolutionizing Science and Engineering through Cyberinfrastructure [EB/OL]. [2019-10-18]. https://www.nsf.gov/cise/sci/reports/atkins.pdf.
[ 2 ] Al-Aufi A， Fulton C. Impact of social networking tools on scholarly communication： a cross-institutional study[J]. The Electronic Library， 2015， 33（2）： 224–241.
[ 3 ] Megwalu A. Academic social networking： a case study on users’ information behavior[M]//Current Issues in Libraries， Information Science and Related Fields. Emerald Group Publishing Limited， 2015： 185–214.
[ 4 ] Kim Y. An empirical study of biological scientists’ article sharing through ResearchGate： Examining attitudinal， normative， and control beliefs[J]. Aslib Journal of Information Management， 2018， 70（5）：
458–480.

[ 5 ] 甘春梅. 学术博客用户行为及其影响因素研究[D].武汉：华中师范大学， 2013.[ 6 ] Crawford M. Biologists using social-networking sites to boost collaboration[J]. BioScience， 2011， 61（9）： 736.
[ 7 ] Gao H， Hu C， Jiang T. An exploratory study of paper sharing in Mendeley's public groups[J]. iConference 2015 Proceedings， 2015.
[ 8 ] Curry R， Kiddle C， Simmonds R. Social networking and scientific gateways[C]//Proceedings of the 5th Grid Computing Environments Workshop. ACM， 2009： 4.
[ 9 ] Rohani V A， Ow S H. Eliciting Essential Requirements for Social Networks in Academic Environments [C]//2011 IEEE Symposium on Computers & Informatics. IEEE， 2011： 171–176.
[10] Bukvova H. A holistic approach to the analysis of online profiles[J]. Internet Research， 2012， 22（3）：
340–360.
[11] Veletsianos G， Kimmons R. Scholars and faculty members’ lived experiences in online social networks[J]. The Internet and Higher Education， 2013， 16： 43–50.
[12] Jordan K. Academics and their online networks： Exploring the role of academic social networking sites[J]. First Monday， 2014，19（11）.
[13] Staniland M. How do researchers use social media and scholarly collaboration networks （SCNs）? [EB/OL]. [2018-11-29]. http://blogs.nature.com/ofschemesandmemes/2017/06/15/how-do-researchers-use-social-media-and-scholarly-collaboration-networks-scns.
[14] Almousa O. Users’ classification and usage-pattern identification in academic social networks[C]//2011 IEEE Jordan Conference on Applied Electrical Engineering and Computing.
[15] Menendez M， De Angeli A， Menestrina Z. Exploring the virtual space of academia[M]//From research to practice in the design of cooperative systems： Results and open challenges. London： Springer， 2012： 49–63.
[16] Jeng W， He D， Jiang J， et al. Groups in Mendeley：
Owners’ descriptions and group outcomes[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012， 49（1）： 1–4.
[17] Oh J S， Jeng W. Groups in academic social networking services—an exploration of their potential as a platform for multi-disciplinary collaboration[C]//2011 IEEE Third International Conference on Privacy， Security， Risk and Trust and 2011 IEEE Third International Conference on Social Computing. IEEE， 2011： 545–548.
[18] Al-Daihani S M， Al-Qallaf J S， AlSaheeb S A. Use of social media by social science academics for scholarly communication[J]. Global Knowledge， Memory and Communication， 2018， 67（6/7）： 412–424.
[19] Zhao S， Grasmuck S， Martin J. Identity construction
on Facebook： Digital empowerment in anchored relationships[J]. Computers in human behavior， 2008， 24（5）： 1816–1836.
[20] Chen C H， DesArmo J， Ke H R. Exploring Reasons for Use or Non-Use of Academic Social Network Services among Taiwanese Fishery Scientists[J]. Journal of Library & Information Science Research， 2016， 11（1）：85–105.
[21] Mohammadi E， Thelwall M， Haustein S， et al. Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology， 2015， 66（9）：1832–1846.
[22] Nicholas D，Herman E，Jamali H，et al. New ways of building，showcasing，and measuring scholarly
reputation[J]. Learned Publishing，2015，28（3）：169–183.
[23] Thelwall M， Kousha K. Academia. edu： Social network or Academic Network? [J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology， 2014， 65（4）： 721–731.
[24] 严玲艳，王一鸣，肖钠. 基于学术社交平台的学术出版价值链延伸[J]. 情报资料工作，2019，40（6）：
44–50.
[25] Salahshour M， Dahlan H M， Iahad N A. A Case of academic social networking sites usage in Malaysia： drivers， benefits， and barriers[J]. International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach （IJITSA）， 2016， 9（2）： 88–99.
[26] 王子喜，杜荣. 人际信任和自我效能对虚拟社区知识共享和参与水平的影响研究[J]. 情报理论与实践， 2011， 34（10）：71–74.
[27] Yan Z， Wang T， Chen Y， et al. Knowledge sharing in online health communities： A social exchange theory perspective[J]. Information & Management， 2016， 53（5）： 643–653.
[28] Phang C W， Kankanhalli A， Sabherwal R. Usability and sociability in online communities： A co mparative study of knowledge seeking and contribution[J]. Journal of the association for Information Systems， 2009， 10（10）： 2.
[29] Li N， Gillet D . Identifying Influential Scholars in Academic Social Media Platforms[C]//International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis & Mining. IEEE Computer Society， 2013.