Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ELPUB 2010


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ELPUB 2010

  1. 1. If you build it, will they come? Ellen Collins, Research Information Network ELPUB, 16-18 June 2010, Helsinki How researchers perceive and use web 2.0
  2. 2. Overview <ul><li>Web 2.0 and academics </li></ul><ul><li>Method </li></ul><ul><li>Usage </li></ul><ul><li>Attitudes </li></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul>
  3. 3. Web 2.0 and academics <ul><li>Tools developed specifically for academics </li></ul><ul><li>Open knowledge agenda </li></ul><ul><li>But what is really happening? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Are researchers using these tools? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What do they think of them? </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Method <ul><li>Mixed methodology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Email survey </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In-depth interviews </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Case studies </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Usage 13 % frequent users 45% occasional 39% non-users
  6. 6. Demographics <ul><li>Adoption is associated with: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Being male </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Older age </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More senior positions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maths and computer science </li></ul></ul><ul><li>But social networking is different </li></ul>
  7. 7. Collaboration
  8. 8. Encouragement
  9. 9. Attitudes
  10. 10. Attitudes Likelihood that online activity will supplement peer review
  11. 11. Attitudes Likelihood that online publication will grow in importance
  12. 12. Attitudes: visibility ‘ If it increases your profile, and more people were aware of the work you did, that would be a benefit’ ‘ I don’t see why I wouldn’t also take an online recommendation [in the same way as face-to-face recommendations]’
  13. 13. Attitudes: communication ‘ You can have a conversation of more than just two-way ‘ You can talk about your research findings…and people can comment or interact without having to wait until your final output is a journal article that will appear in print’
  14. 14. Attitudes: trust Content ‘ I wouldn’t use Wikipedia or anything like that, anything that isn’t peer reviewed like that is worthless’ ‘ I have a negative attitude to using videos and blogs in research. Once it’s finished it should be published otherwise it will be anarchy in science’ ‘ It would be nice if the community felt a little less competitive and a bit more open about sharing data’ Process IPR
  15. 15. Implications <ul><li>Single approach unlikely to have much success </li></ul><ul><li>Engagement in future, but not now </li></ul><ul><li>Intellectual property issues need to be resolved </li></ul><ul><li>Certain people are key to encouraging success: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Library and information services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conference organisers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local research groups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High-profile users </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. References Proctor, R., Willians, R., Stewart, J., Poschen, M., Snee, H., Voss, A. and Asgari-Targhi, M. (Forthcoming) ‘Adoption and Use of Web 2.0 in Scholarly Communications’. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A . Collins, E., and Hide, B. (2010) ‘Use and Relevance of Web 2.0 Resources for Researchers’. Publishing in the Networked World: Transforming the Nature of Communication, 14th International Conference on Electronic Publishing 16-18 June 2010, Helsinki, Finland. Research Information Network (2010), If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0 .
  17. 17. Contact Ellen Collins [email_address] Branwen Hide [email_address]