Toward a homogenization of academic social sites

Ortega, José Luís

doi:10.1108/oir-01-2016-0012

Cited by 31 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The presence of researchers on the four sites grouped by scientific disciplines (i.e. STM or HSS) is presented in Fig 1. As previously described, our data show that HSS researchers are over-represented on Academia.edu [17,27], whereas STM researchers were over-represented on ResearchGate [7,17,18,23,38]. However, regardless of the fact that ORCID and ResearcherID are not known to be specifically dedicated to HSS or STM, STM researchers were over-represented on them.…”

Section: Number Of Profiles By Scientific Disciplinessupporting

confidence: 70%

Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (Academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the University of Caen Normandy (France): A case study

Boudry

Durand-Barthez

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper was to assess the presence of researchers on two author identifier services (ORCID and ResearcherID) and to compare the results with two academic social networks (Academia.edu and ResearchGate) using the categories of discipline, career advancement, and gender in a medium sized multidisciplinary university in France (University of Caen Normandy). Metrics such as number of publications per researcher, h-indexes, and average number of citations were also assessed. Of the 1,047 researchers studied, 673 (64.3%) had at least one profile on the four sites, and the number of researchers having multiple profiles decreased as more sites were studied. Researchers with only one profile numbered 385 (36.8%), while 204 (19.5%) had two, 68 (6.5%) had three, and only 16 (1.5%) had four. ResearchGate had by far the highest number of researchers present, with 569 (54.3%), whereas presence on the other sites was about 15%. We found that, apart from Academia.edu, researchers in Sciences, Technology, and Medicine (STM) were over-represented. Overall, experienced male researchers were over-represented on the sites studied. Our results show that, because of the numerous profiles lacking publication references (particularly on ORCID) and a low presence of researchers on the four sites studied (except for ResearchGate), assessing the number of publications, h-indexes, or average number of citations per article of individuals or institutions remains challenging. Finally, our data showed that French researchers have not adopted the use of the two author identifier sites (i.e. ORCID and ResearcherID). As long as French researchers remain reticent, these sites will not be able to provide the services for which they were created: addressing the problem of author misidentification, consequently providing exhaustive access to scientific production and bibliometric indicators of individual researchers and their institutions.

show abstract

Section: Number Of Profiles By Scientific Disciplinessupporting

confidence: 70%

Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (Academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the University of Caen Normandy (France): A case study

Boudry

Durand-Barthez

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, academics linked to pure and experimental sciences appear more inclined to use these platforms than are their counterparts in the social sciences and humanities (Arcila, et al, 2013). Also, academics from different fields prefer different SNS (Ortega, 2017). Thus distinctions were drawn between the natural sciences, experimental science, and engineering, and the social sciences and humanities.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spanish academics and social networking sites: Use, non-use, and the perceived advantages and drawbacks of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, ResearchGate, and Academia.edu

Segado‐Boj

Díaz-Campo

Gómez

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines Spanish academics’ motives for using social networking sites (SNS) and their perceptions regarding the limitations of and drawbacks to social media. We analyse 18 in-depth interviews conducted with Spanish university professors chosen according to their disciplines, academic ranks and level of use. Our findings confirm prior research based on the uses and gratifications theory. Thus, we conclude that SNS are used for managing content, identifying experts in a researcher’s field of knowledge. In addition, academics need to manage different personal identities in each SNS they use.

show abstract

“…The results suggest that over time the differences in disciplinary populations observed at different sites may equilibrate over time, as growth of the initially well represented subjects slowed in the sample while growth increased in under-represented areas. Growth rates also showed differences according to job position and academic seniority, with Academia.edu showing an increase in more senior academics, while ResearchGate shows growth in terms of more junior academics and graduate students (Ortega, 2017).…”

Section: Platform Demographics and Social Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

From Social Networks to Publishing Platforms: A Review of the History and Scholarship of Academic Social Network Sites

Jordan

2019

Front. Digit. Humanit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social network sites enable people to easily connect to and communicate with others. Following the success of generic platforms such as Facebook, a variety of online services launched during the mid 2000s in order to bring the benefits of online social networking to an academic audience. However, it is not clear whether these academic social network sites (ASNS) are primarily aligned with social networking or alternative publishing, and functionalities continue to change. Now 10 years since the launch of the three main platforms which currently lead the market (Academia.edu, ResearchGate, and Mendeley), it is timely to review how and why ASNS are used. This paper discusses the history and definition of ASNS, before providing a comprehensive review of the empirical research related to ASNS to-date. Five main themes within the research literature are identified, including: the relationship of the platforms to Open Access publishing; metrics; interactions with others through the platforms; platform demographics and social structure; and user perspectives. Discussing the themes in the research both provides academics with a greater understanding of what ASNS can do and their limitations, and identifies gaps in the literature which would be valuable to explore in future research.

show abstract

Toward a homogenization of academic social sites

Cited by 31 publications

References 36 publications

Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (Academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the University of Caen Normandy (France): A case study

Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (Academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the University of Caen Normandy (France): A case study

Spanish academics and social networking sites: Use, non-use, and the perceived advantages and drawbacks of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, ResearchGate, and Academia.edu

From Social Networks to Publishing Platforms: A Review of the History and Scholarship of Academic Social Network Sites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About