Invited talk given as part of the Nuffield/Oxford Internet Institute Social Netowkrs Seminar Series at Nuffield College. I thank Bernie Hogan for inviting me and Ralph Schroeder and Eric Meyer for being my hosts at OII.
A Tale of Two Platforms: Emerging communicative patterns in two scientific blog networks
Cornelius Puschmann School of Library and Information Science, Humboldt University of Berlin / Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG) A Tale of Two Platforms:Emerging communicative patterns in two scientiﬁc blog networksNufﬁeld/Oxford Internet Institute Social Networks Seminar Series Nufﬁeld College, Oxford 11th February 2013 photos by http://www.ﬂickr.com/people/7455207@N05/
This talkThe context of my research Framing the issue: How can we describe new forms of scholarly communication online?Tracing the evolution of two scholary blog platforms
in a broader sense: science and scholarship as networks of knowledge (citation networks, social networks, conceptual networks)net· workˈnet-ˌwərk in a narrower sense: hyperlinks between blogs on two scholarly blogging platforms
Prior and related research• Junior Researchers Group „Science and the Internet“ (University of Düsseldorf, 2010-2012)• Networking, visibility, information: a study of digital genres of scholarly communication and the motives of their users (DFG grant, Humboldt University Berlin, 3/2012-2/2015)• Open Science project (Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society, 2011-)• Oxford e-Social Science Project (OeSS, 2005-2012)
"Scholarship in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities isevolving, but at different rates and in different ways. While thenew technologies receive the most attention, it is theunderlying social and policy changes that are most profound...This is an opportune moment to think about what we shouldbe building." (Borgman, 2008, p. xvii)
methods/tools data peer ication revicom mun ew How does the Internet reshape science and scholarship? funding mology relationship with the public e pisto
be tw a ee ma n te collaboraon 1.0 (sharing) sc u r ien s s ts an d collaboraon 2.0 (contribung)am collaboraon 3.0 (cocreang) on g s cie s n ts (Du9on, 2008)
How signiﬁcant is social media for scholarly communication?• Internet users who (some/mes) read blogs: • Germany: 7% (ARD/ZDF Onlinestudie 2011) • USA: 32% (Pew Internet 2010) • Japan: 80% (comScore 2011)• Researchers who (some/mes) read blogs: • Germany: 8% (study „Digitale WissenschaPskommunika/on“ 2010-‐2011) • UK: ~7% (study „Impact of Web 2.0 on Scholarly Communica/on“ 2009)The acceptance of blogs varies greatly from country to country!
How signiﬁcant is social media for scholarly communication?"How do you stay in touch with colleagues?" (survey among researchers conducted by Bader, Fritz & Gloning, 2012) • in person: 96%• phone: 49%• audio/videoconferencing: 21%• email: 94% • mailing lists: 24%• blogs: 4% (law: 10%)• scholarly social networks (e.g. ResearchGATE): 5%• conven/onal social networks (e.g. Facebook): 5%• Twiger: 2%• wikis: 6%
Is anything new? • formal scholarly communication is a highly resilient system • acceptance and use of social media among academics remains low • but: ,pockets‘ of adoption exist in some local and disciplinary scholary communities
Scholarly blog research• Mortensen and Walker (2002): blogs as tools for writing and knowledge management• Walker (2006): change of usage over time• Gregg (2009): blogs as a subcultural form of expression, part of constructing a professional identity• Bar-Ilan (2004): aims of scholars inferred from form and content• Luzón (2009): use of hyperlinks in academic blogs• Kouper (2010): “virtual water cooler” for experts• Kjellberg (2010): diverse set of functions for different users• Shema, Bar-Ilan, & Thelwall (2012): what sources of research do scholarly bloggers link to?• Fausto et al (2012): systematic content-based study of ResearchBlogging.org (dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050109)
Aims of blog data analysis1. Exploration How can academic blogging be best described?2. Comparison to antecedent genres How do practices in academic blogging differ from practices in formal publishing?3. Comparison of platforms How do scholarly blog platforms compare? comments content language use of hyperlinks
Hypotheses.org(*) Researchblogging.org(**) Hypotheses.org: disciplines of most active blogs (n=74) History SociologyPolitical Science Asian Studies Library Science other Cultural Studies Urban Studies * based on those blogs with more than 100 posts (n=74) ** reproduced from Fausto et al, 2012
Hypotheses.org: languages by post french other catalan german spanishportuguese english
Hypotheses.org: active blogs per year 400 300blogs 200 100 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
0 500 1000 15002004−012004−022004−032004−042004−052004−062004−072004−082004−092004−102004−112004−122005−012005−022005−032005−042005−052005−062005−072005−082005−092005−102005−112005−122006−012006−022006−032006−042006−052006−062006−072006−082006−092006−102006−112006−122007−012007−022007−032007−042007−052007−062007−072007−082007−092007−102007−112007−122008−012008−022008−032008−042008−052008−062008−072008−082008−092008−102008−112008−12 Posts per month starting 2004−012009−012009−022009−032009−042009−052009−062009−072009−082009−092009−102009−112009−122010−012010−022010−032010−042010−052010−062010−072010−082010−092010−102010−112010−122011−012011−022011−032011−04 Hypotheses.org v. Researchblogging.org2011−052011−062011−072011−082011−092011−102011−112011−122012−012012−022012−032012−042012−052012−062012−07
Hypotheses: blogs by number of posts 6000 5000number of posts 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1 19 40 61 82 106 133 160 187 214 241 268 295 322 349 376 403 430 rank
Observations1. Different platforms are very heterogenic in terms of disciplines, languages, blogging style, ...2. Hypotheses.org has both grown over time and the blogs in it have become more closely connected3. Subgroups emerge based on different factors (topic, language, geography)4. Bloggers link to a variety of sites, but a large proportion is academic5. Self-citation is very widespread
Bibliography1. Bar-Ilan, J. (2004). An outsider’s view on topic-oriented blogging. Proceedings of the 13th international World Wide Web conference on Alternate track papers & posters (pp. 28–34). New York: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1013367.10133732. Fausto, S., Machado, F. a, Bento, L. F. J., Iamarino, A., Nahas, T. R., & Munger, D. S. (2012). Research blogging: indexing and registering the change in science 2.0. PloS one, 7(12), e50109. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 00501093. Gregg, M. (2009). Banal Bohemia: Blogging from the Ivory Tower Hot-Desk. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 15(4), 470–483. doi:10.1177/13548565093423454. Kjellberg, S. (2010). I am a Blogging Researcher: Motivations for Blogging in a Scholarly Context. First Monday, 15(8). Retrieved from http://ﬁrstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/ 2962/25805. Kouper, I. (2010). Science blogs and public engagement with science: practices, challenges, and opportunities. Journal of Science Communication, 9(1), A02. Retrieved from http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/09/01/ Jcom0901(2010)A02/6. Luzón, M. J. (2009). Scholarly hyperwriting: The function of links in academic weblogs. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 75–89. doi:10.1002/asi.209377. Mortensen, T., & Walker, J. (2002). Blogging thoughts: personal publication as an online research tool. In A. Morrison (Ed.), (pp. 249–279). Oslo: InterMedia/UniPub.8. Shema, H., Bar-Ilan, J., & Thelwall, M. (2012). Research blogs and the discussion of scholarly information. PloS one, 7(5), e35869. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.00358699. Walker, J. (2006). Blogging from inside the ivory tower. In A. Bruns & J. Jacobs (Eds.), Uses of Blogs (pp. 127– 138). New York: Peter Lang Publishers.