Presencia, actividad, visibilidad e interdisciplinariedad del profesorado universitario de Documentación en los medios sociales: una perspectiva de género

Michela Montesi; Isabel Villaseñor Rodríguez; Fernando Bittencourt dos Santos

doi:10.3989/redc.2019.4.1640

Autores/as

Michela Montesi Facultad de Ciencias de la Documentación, Universidad Complutense de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5509-2075
Isabel Villaseñor Rodríguez Facultad de Ciencias de la Documentación, Universidad Complutense de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6000-7824
Fernando Bittencourt dos Santos Universidade Federal de Sergipe https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1305-4262

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2019.4.1640

Palabras clave:

medios sociales académicos, sesgo de género, actividad investigadora, métricas alternativas, Biblioteconomía y Documentación

Resumen

Se estudia la presencia, actividad, visibilidad e interdisciplinaridad de 349 profesoras y profesores de Documentación en los medios sociales, para comprobar si existen diferencias entre los dos conjuntos. Las plataformas estudiadas incluyen ResearchGate (RG), Google Scholar Citations (GSC), y Twitter, y la población analizada corresponde al profesorado de 13 universidades españolas que ofertan formación en Biblioteconomía y Documentación. Los datos se recogieron entre abril y junio de 2018. Para las cuatro dimensiones de estudio se analizaron diferentes variables, incluyendo, entre otros, el número de documentos subidos a RG y el número de tweets, respuestas y retweets en Twitter para la actividad, y el porcentaje de documentos en acceso abierto y de documentos diferentes a los géneros tradicionales en RG y el número de seguidores y seguidoras por perfil en Twitter para la visibilidad. Los resultados apuntan a diferencias entre los dos colectivos, especialmente acentuadas en términos de visibilidad.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Abramo, G.; D'Angelo, C. A.; Murgia, G. (2013). Gender differences in research collaboration. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 811-822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.07.002

Álvarez Bornstein, B.; Montesi, M. (2016). La comunicación entre investigadores en Twitter. Una etnografía virtual en el ámbito de las ciencias de la documentación. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 39(4), 8. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1352

Araújo, E. B.; Araújo, N. A.; Moreira, A. A.; Herrmann, H. J.; Andrade Jr, J. S. (2017). Gender differences in scientific collaborations: Women are more egalitarian than men. PloS one, 12(5), e0176791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176791 PMid:28489872 PMCid:PMC5425184

Barbour, K.; Marshall, D. (2012). The academic online: Constructing persona through the World Wide Web. First Monday, 17(9). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v0i0.3969

Beaudry, C.; Larivière, V. (2016). Which gender gap? Factors affecting researchers' scientific impact in science and medicine. Research Policy, 45(9), 1790-1817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.05.009

Bik, H. M.; Goldstein, M. C. (2013). An introduction to social media for scientists. PLoS biology, 11(4), e1001535. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001535 PMid:23630451 PMCid:PMC3635859

Brown Jarreau, P.; Porter, L. (2017). Science in the social media age: profiles of science blog readers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 142-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016685558

Collins, K.; Shiffman, D.; Rock, J. (2016). How are scientists using social media in the workplace?. PloS one, 11(10), e0162680. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162680 PMid:27732598 PMCid:PMC5061391

Copiello, S.; Bonifaci, P. (2018). A few remarks on ResearchGate score and academic reputation. Scientometrics, 114(1), 301-306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2582-9

Costas, R.; van Honk, J.; Franssen, T. (2017). Scholars on Twitter: who and how many are they? 16th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, October 16-20, Wuhan, China. Disponible en: https:// arxiv.org/abs/1712.05667 [última consulta: 22-12- 2018].

Donelan, H. (2016). Social media for professional development and networking opportunities in academia. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40(5), 706-729. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2015.1014321

Galyani Moghaddam, G. (2010). Information technology and gender gap: toward a global view. The Electronic Library, 28(5), 722-733. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471011081997

García Nieto, M. T. (2013). ¿Son invisibles las mujeres científicas? Estudios sobre el mensaje periodístico, 19, 783-792. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_ESMP.2013.v19.42161

Ghiasi, G.; Harsh, M.; Schiffauerova, A. (2018). Inequality and collaboration patterns in Canadian nanotechnology: implications for pro-poor and gender-inclusive policy. Scientometrics, 115(2), 785-815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2701-2

Greifeneder, E.; Pontis, S.; Blandford, A.; Attalla, H.; Neal, D.; Schlebbe, K. (2018). Researchers' attitudes towards the use of social networking sites. Journal of Documentation, 74(1), 119-136. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-04-2017-0051

Helmer, M.; Schottdorf, M.; Neef, A.; Battaglia, D. (2017). Gender bias in scholarly peer review. Elife, 6, e21718. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21718.012

Holmberg, K.; Thelwall, M. (2014). Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1027-1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3

Jhonnel Alarco, J.; Álvarez-Andrade, E. V.; Arroyo-Hernández, H. (2016). Diferencia de género en investigadores peruanos según Google Académico, Gaceta Sanitaria, 30(2), 160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2015.12.003 PMid:26832856

Ke, Q.; Ahn, Y. Y.; Sugimoto, C. R. (2017). A systematic identification and analysis of scientists on Twitter. PloS one, 12(4), e0175368. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175368 PMid:28399145 PMCid:PMC5388341

Kim, Y. M. (2010). Gender role and the use of university library website resources: A social cognitive theory perspective. Journal of Information Science, 36(5), 603- 617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551510377709

Kjellberg, S.; Haider, J.; Sundin, O. (2016). Researchers' use of social network sites: A scoping review. Library & Information Science Research, 38(3), 224-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2016.08.008

Knobloch-Westerwick, S.; Glynn, C. J. (2013). The Matilda effect-Role congruity effects on scholarly communication: A citation analysis of Communication Research and Journal of Communication articles. Communication Research, 40(1), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211418339

Larivière, V.; Ni, C.; Gingras, Y.; Cronin, B.; Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science. Nature News, 504(7479), 211. https://doi.org/10.1038/504211a PMid:24350369

Larivière, V.; Vignola-Gagné, E.; Villeneuve, C.; Gélinas, P.; Gingras, Y. (2011). Sex differences in research funding, productivity and impact: an analysis of Québec university professors. Scientometrics, 87(3), 483-498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0369-y

Leahey, E. (2006). Gender differences in productivity: Research specialization as a missing link. Gender & Society, 20(6), 754-780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243206293030

Maliniak, D.; Powers, R.; Walter, B. F. (2013). The gender citation gap in international relations. International Organization, 67(4), 889-922. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818313000209

Martínez Lirola, M. (2010). Notas sobre la visibilidad y la invisibilidad de las mujeres en nuestra sociedad: el caso concreto de la Universidad de Alicante. Revista Nuevas Tendencias en Antropología, 2, pp. 37-58.

Martínez Lirola, M. (2011). Explorando la invisibilidad de mujeres de diferentes culturas en la sociedad y en los medios de comunicación. Palabra Clave, 13(1), pp. 161-173. https://doi.org/10.5294/pacla.2010.13.1.10

Mas-Bleda, A.; Aguillo, I.F. (2015). La web social como nuevo medio de comunicación y evaluación científica. Barcelona: Editorial UOC y EPI.

Mas-Bleda, A.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social web? Scientometrics, 101(1), 337-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1345-0

Mauleón, E.; Hillán, L.; Moreno, L.; Gómez, I.; Bordons, M. (2013). Assessing gender balance among journal authors and editorial board members. Scientometrics, 95(1), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0824-4

Meishar-Tal, H.; Pieterse, E. (2017). Why do academics use academic social networking sites? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(1), https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i1.2643

Messias, J.; Vikatos, P.; Benevenuto, F. (2017). White, man, and highly followed: Gender and race inequalities in Twitter. Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Intelligence Pages, WI 17, Leipzig, Germany - August 23 - 26, 266-274. https://doi.org/10.1145/3106426.3106472

Mikki, S.; Zygmuntowska, M.; Gjesdal, Ø. L.; Al Ruwehy, H. A. (2015). Digital presence of Norwegian scholars on academic network sites-where and who are they? PloS one, 10(11), e0142709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142709 PMid:26565408 PMCid:PMC4643921

Mitchell, S. M.; Lange, S., Brus, H. (2013). Gendered citation patterns in international relations journals. International Studies Perspectives, 14(4), 485-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12026

Nentwich, M.; König, R. (2014). Academia goes Facebook? The potential of social network sites in the scholarly realm. In: Bartling S., Friesike S. (eds) Opening Science. Cham: Springer, pp. 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_7

Nicholas, D.; Rodríguez-Bravo, B.; Watkinson, A.; Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C.; Herman, E.; Xu, J.; Abriza, A.; ?wigo?, M. (2017). Early career researchers and their publishing and authorship practices. Learned Publishing, 30(3), 205-217. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1102

Nilizadeh, S.; Groggel, A.; Lista, P.; Das, S.; Ahn, Y. Y.; Kapadia, A.; Rojas, F. (2016). Twitter's Glass Ceiling: The Effect of Perceived Gender on Online Visibility. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2016), Cologne, Germany, May 17-20, pp. 289-298.

Orduña-Malea, E.; Martín-Martín, A.; Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2016). La bibliometría que viene: ALMetrics (Author Level Metrics) y las múltiples caras del impacto de un autor. El profesional de la información, 25(3), 485-496. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.may.18

Orduña-Malea, E.; Martín-Martín, A.; Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2016a). ResearchGate como fuente de evaluación científica: desvelando sus aplicaciones bibliométricas. El profesional de la información (EPI), 25(2), 303-310. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.mar.18

Orduña-Malea, E.; Martín-Martín, A.; Thelwall, M.; López- Cózar, E. D. (2017). Do ResearchGate Scores create ghost academic reputations? Scientometrics, 112(1), 443-460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2396-9

Ortega, J. L. (2015). Disciplinary differences in the use of academic social networking sites. Online Information Review, 39(4), 520-536. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2015-0093

Ortega, J. L. (2017). Toward a homogenization of academic social sites: A longitudinal study of profiles in Academia. edu, Google Scholar Citations and ResearchGate. Online Information Review, 41(6), 812-825. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-01-2016-0012

Paul-Hus, A.; Sugimoto, C. R.; Haustein, S.; Larivière, V. (2015). Is there a gender gap in social media metrics? In: Proceedings of ISSI 2015-15th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, June 29-July 3, 2015, Isanbul, Turkey, pp 37-45.

Peñas, C. S.; Willett, P. (2006). Brief communication: Gender differences in publication and citation counts in librarianship and information science research. Journal of Information Science, 32(5), 480-485. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506066058

Potthoff, M.; Zimmermann, F. (2017). Is there a gender-based fragmentation of communication science? An investigation of the reasons for the apparent gender homophily in citations. Scientometrics, 112(2), 1047- 1063. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2392-0

Procter, R.; Williams, R.; Stewart, J.; Poschen, M.; Snee, H.; Voss, A.; Asgari-Targhi, M. (2010). Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in scholarly communications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368(1926), 4039-4056. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0155 PMid:20679121

Rinaldi, A. (2014). Spinning the web of open science: Social networks for scientists and data sharing, together with open access, promise to change the way research is conducted and communicated. EMBO Reports, 15(4), 342-346. https://doi.org/10.1002/embr.201438659 PMid:24652852 PMCid:PMC3989665

Sugimoto, C. R.; Work, S.; Larivière, V.; Haustein, S. (2017). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2037- 2062. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23833

Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K. (2014). Academia.edu: social network or academic network?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 721-731. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23038

Tsou, A.; Bowman, T. D.; Sugimoto, T.; Lariviere, V.; Sugimoto, C. R. (2016). Self-presentation in scholarly profiles: Characteristics of images and perceptions of professionalism and attractiveness on academic social networking sites. First Monday, 21(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i4.6381

Van Rijnsoever, F. J.; Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.001

Ward, J.; Bejarano, W.; Dudás, A. (2015). Scholarly social media profiles and libraries: A review. Liber Quarterly, 24(4). https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.9958

Wildgaard, L.; Schneider, J. W.; Larsen, B. (2014). A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 101(1), 125-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1423-3

Woolley, R.; Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M.; Turpin, T.; Marceau, J. (2014). Research collaboration in the social sciences: What factors are associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration?. Science and Public Policy, 42(4), 567-582. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu074

Zhu, Y.; Purdam, K. (2017). Social media, science communication and the academic super user in the United Kingdom. First Monday, 22(11). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v22i11.7866 PMCid:PMC5914310