Presented at LILAC 2016

1. We’re Researchers!
Shazia Arif
Subject Liaison Librarian
Brunel University London
Dr Konstantina Martzoukou
Course Leader
Department of Information
Management
Robert Gordon University

2. Background
• Libraries andWeb 2.0 – shifting power, provider to user
• Changing information search and use habits – easy access /
instant solvability / immediate use
• Librarians reinventing their roles and bringing their services to
the user communities they serve.

3. Digital literacy
• “those capabilities that mean an individual is fit for living,
learning and working in a digital society. Digital literacy is about
being able to make use of technologies to participate in and
contribute to modern social, cultural, political and economic life”
(BCS, 2016 The Chartered Institute for IT).
• ‘digital capabilities’: “more a condition to attain than a threshold
to cross, are role specific, ever changing and require embedding
into the curriculum or role”. (UCISA, 2014?)

4. Digital literacies (JISC infoNet 2014)

5. http://www.coreysmith.ws/blog/social-media-explained-
bacon

6. • Information searching and browsing platforms
– sharing and communication of ideas, linking to professional groups of
interest and creating online communities of practice
• New dimension of finding information on the Internet
– regular monitoring, browsing, actively seeking answers to specific
information needs, serendipitous information discovery
– Morris et al. (2010) Facebook and Twitter users:
• status message to ask questions of their social networks
• opinion-type answers, useful for subjective questions, results from social network
highly trustworthy, delivery of personalized answers, additional context,
confirmation of results found via a search engine
Social Media

7. Aims of research study
• To investigate the digital literacy competencies of PhD
students at Brunel University on the basis of incorporating
social networking sites throughout the research cycle.
• To propose recommendations for the design of a digital
literacy programme, focusing on the use of online social
networking sites for PhD students at Brunel university library
and to academic libraries in general.

8. Research questions
• What is the social media use of doctoral researchers at
Brunel?
• Do they use them for specific activities that relate to
their research activities? (e.g. sharing research, finding
information, collaboration, networking, communication,
referencing)
• Do they assign value to social media tools for research
purposes?
• What are the barriers to using social media tools?

9. Rationale
• “We need to understand learners’ personal digital literacies
before ploughing into 'supporting' them” (White, 2012)
• Lack of specific research on the use of social networking sites
for every aspect of the research life-cycle by doctoral
students; “most are camouflaged in larger studies of social
media” (Nandez and Borrego, 2013).
• May require to focus on a higher level of social media skills
at doctoral level.

10. Previous research
• “Current institutional engagement with open web andWeb
2.0 technologies does not convince the majority of
GenerationY doctoral students of the credibility of using such
applications in a research setting, and reinforces their feeling
that actively using, for example, social media and online
forums in research lacks legitimacy...
• …New web-based and other tools and applications may also
challenge their traditional and conservative research working
practices” (The British Library and HEFCE 2012, p.6)

11. Vitae RDF
TheVitae (2010)
researcher development
framework (RDF)
describes the "knowledge,
skills, behaviours and
personal attributes of
researchers at different
stages of their careers".

12. Academic research cycle

13. Methodology/Approach
• An action research based methodology:
– a form of investigation into existing practices
– data employed in reflection, decision-making and the development of improved practice
(Parsons and Brown 2002).
– current behaviours and barriers in the use of social
networking tools by doctoral researchers at Brunel University
London.
(Lewin, 1994)

14. • Section 1: demographic data (e.g. age, gender,
department, year of study)
• Section 2: current use of social media for research,
teaching, employment and personal use/leisure.
• Section 3: social networking sites mapped to
activities required for a PhD qualification.
• Section 4: barriers to use
• Section 5: current methods of keeping up-to-date.
Questionnaire

15. General findings
• 80 postgraduates responded to the survey
• courses in other disciplines such as business,
are already integrating social media training
• but the findings revealed that there is a gap in
the training of science and engineering
postgraduates

16. Age
18-30 years: 49%
31-40 years: 35%
41-60 years: 16%
Nationality
UK: 40%
EU & International:
60%
Age, Gender and Nationality

17. Department andYear of Study

19. Use of social media networking sites
(e.g. Facebook, LinkedIn,Academia.edu)
Use of social bookmarking sites
(e.g. Mendeley, Zotero, Digg, Delicious)

20. Use of blogs/microblogs
(e.g. Blogger/Wordpress,Twitter)
Sharing sites
(e.g. Flickr,YouTube, Dropbox,
Pinterest)

21. PhD activities: Organising, collating references /
Collaboration

22. Dissemination & Networking

23. How helpful are social media in
connecting you to people who
share your research interests?
How helpful are social media
tools in saving you time in
finding relevant information?

24. Social media use and development of skills

25. Value for research activities

26. What deters you from using these tools for
your research?
I think they are
time consuming
to learn and
use:
11%
I have concerns about
privacy issues
24%
I find the tools are
distracting/time-wasting
18%
The lack of
support/training at my
University
10%
I don't think these tools
can make a useful
contribution to my
research activities
15%
I lack the technical know-
how
3%
I don't know how they
could enhance my
studies/career
14%
Other
5%
10. What stops/deters you from using these tools for your research?

27. Findings: free text comments

28. PhD video
Monica talks about the use
of social media tools for
her PhD research

29. Findings: Use of Social Media
• the majority of doctoral researchers' have not adopted
social networking tools or use them sporadically and in
more limited ways
– “while all the tools studies have found a place in the research life
cycle, very few researchers were using the full social gamut”
(Rowland et al 2011 p. 186)
• Most researchers prefer using social media for
personal/leisure purposes rather than PhD purposes.
• However, paradoxically, they find them valuable for
connecting with people, finding and sharing information.
They also help them save time.

30. Findings: Use of Social Media
• There are differences in the use of the various categories of
social media
– highest use for PhD purposes is sharing websites (35%) - (e.g. Flickr,
YouTube, Dropbox, Pinterest).They are used for organising, collating
references / and collaboration
– Followed by Use of social bookmarking sites (25%) (e.g. Mendeley,
Zotero, Digg, Delicious) that are not used more for any specific PhD
activity
– social media networking sites (12%) (e.g. Facebook, LinkedIn,
Academia.edu) are mostly used for dissemination, networking,
promoting research and collaboration

31. Findings: Barriers to use
• PhD students felt that the had the technical skills or know/how when
selecting social media tools for PhD activities. However, haven’t fully
understood or integrated social networking sites into research activity
• However, had concerns:
– issue of privacy
– difficulty in establishing the added value/contribution of employing
social networking sites throughout and systematically in their PhD
studies.
– Distracting nature of these tools is identified
– However, they were interested to learn more about what value these
tools can add

32. Recommendations for academic
libraries
• Doctoral researchers receive training on research methods but not on
the use of social media for research purposes – digital literacy
sessions focusing on the value of social networking tools for doctoral
study should be offered, addressing the development of different
skills
• the focus should be on raising awareness and understanding of the
tools available to enable doctoral activities, addressing different
research stages and key activities
• Opportunities for doctoral researchers to see how their peers are
using different technologies effectively and discuss their experiences
should be encouraged and facilitated.

33. Conclusions
• Within its modest scope this study has explored incorporating
social networking tools into research activities.
• Social networking tools are beginning to play a significant role
on many aspects of the research lifecycle and researchers,
librarians and academics should aim to explore the hidden
potential of social media tools for research
• Social media is becoming a “personal professional platform”

34. Future research
• Academic staff is another group that needs to be
investigated:
• “Postgraduate researchers are heavily influenced by their supervisors
and very aware of the need for authority and authenticity in the
research resources they select ... the postgraduate researchers'
supervisors play a critical role in their choice and take-up of
technology applications" (Carpenter 2010 p.13).
• More specific associations between specific
demographic characteristics and specific social media
tools
• Critical appraisal and study of impact of existing social
media training sessions

35. References
• Joint Information Systems Committee., Researchers of tomorrow:The
research behaviour of generationY doctoral students. [online]Available
from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2012/researchers-of-
tomorrow.aspx [Accessed 9/2/2016]
• Nández, G. and Borrego, Á., 2013. Use of social networks for academic
purposes: a case study. Electronic Library,The, 31(6), pp. 781-791
• Research Information Network., Social media: A guide for researchers |
research information network [online]Available from:
http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/communicating-and-disseminating-
research/social-media-guide-researchers [Accessed 24/2/2016]

36. References
• Smith, C ., 2012 Explaining social media with bacon [online]Available
from: http://www.coreysmith.ws/blog/social-media-explained-bacon
[Accessed 5/2/2016]
• UCISA 2014 survey of digital capabilities: Embedding and support [online]
Available from: http://www.ucisa.ac.uk/digcap [Accessed 5/2/2016]
• Vitae (2010)The Researcher Development Framework, Available at
http://www.vitae.ac.uk/policy-practice/234301/Researcher-Development-
Framework.html [Accessed 27/2/2016]

38. Thank you
Shazia Arif
Subject Liaison Librarian
Mechanical Aerospace, Civil Engineering and Design
Research Insitutes
Brunel University London
Dr Konstantina Martzoukou
Course Leader
Department of Information Management
Robert Gordon University