Researchers’ communication on Twitter. A virtual ethnography in the area of information science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2016.4.1352Keywords:
Scientific communication, virtual ethnography, altmetrics, Twitter, social web, information scienceAbstract
The present article analyzes the scientific communication that takes place on Twitter. Its aim is to understand and describe the types of scientific activities that occur on this platform, by identifying the type of information exchanged and the activities that researchers perform. Thus we attempt to better understand the number of times that research work is mentioned within a specific context. We followed a group of researchers and professionals with Twitter profiles who had published at least 3 articles in the journal EPI between 2009 and 2013. The research methodology was qualitative using virtual ethnography based on non-participant observation. Among the main conclusions, we found that researchers use Twitter mostly as a way to make their professional activity public and to disseminate their own research works or those of close collaborators, in order to give them more visibility and impact.
Downloads
References
Aleixandre Benavent, R.; Valderrama Zurián, J. C.; González Alca, G. (2007). El factor de impacto de las revistas científicas: limitaciones e indicadores alternativos. El profesional de la información, vol. 16(1), 4-11. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/VFv3wz. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2007.jan.01
Arroyo Vázquez, N. (2012). Contenidos profesionales en Twitter: cuando menos es más. Anuario ThinkEPI, vol. 6, 258-263.
Boyd, D.; Golder, S.; Lotan, G. (2010). Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. Proceedings 43rd Annual Hawai International Conference on Systems Science (HICSS-43), pp. 1-10. Kolua, Hawai: IEEE. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/EhXyqH. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2010.412
Cabezas Clavijo, Á.; Torres Salinas, D. (2010). Indicadores de uso y participación en las revistas científicas 2.0: el caso de PLoSOne. El profesional de la información, vol. 19(4), 431-434. Recuperado de: http://eprints.rclis.org/14801/
Calvillo Jiménez, R. (2013). La comunidad de documentalistas en español de Twitter: estudio etnográfico (Trabajo Fin de Grado). Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/l3vhsn
Casas Romeo, A.; Gázquez Abad, J.C.; Forgas Coll, S.; Huertas García, R. (2014). La netnografía como herramienta de investigación en contextos on-line: una aplicación al análisis de la imagen de los servicios públicos de transporte. Innovar, vol. 24(52), 89-102. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/M5M6XO. https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v24n52.42525
Costas, R.; Zahedi, Z.; Wouters, P. (2014). Do "altmetrics" correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 66 (10), 2003-2019. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/7NRhPb
Eysenbach, G. (2011). Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 13(4).Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/behhPa. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2012
Fresno García, M. (2011). Netnografía. Barcelona: Editorial UOC, p. 106.
Hine, C. (2015). Ethnography for the Internet. Embedded, embodied and everyday. Londres: Bloomsbury, p. 221
Holmberg, K.; Thelwall, M. (2014). Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. Scientometrics, vol. 101(2), 1027-1042. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/0sRNGH. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3
Kozinets, R.V. (2009). Netnography. Doing ethnographic research online. Londres: Sage Publications Ltd.
Letierce, J.; Passant, A.; Breslin, J.; Decker, S. (2010). Understanding how Twitter is used to spread scientific messages. Proceedings of the WebSci10: Extending the Frontiers of Society On-Line. Raleigh, NC: US. Recuperado de: http://journal.webscience.org/314/
Mas-Bleda, A.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Aguillo, I. (2014). Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social web? Scientometrics, vol. 101(1), 337-356. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/z2v3QG
Pickard, A. (2012). Research methods in information. London: Facet Publishing, p. 329.
Priem, J. (2014). Altmetrics. En Cronin, B y Sugimoto, C.R. (editores.) Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multi-dimensional indicators of performance,263-287, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Priem, J.; Taraborelli, D.; Groth, P.; Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A manifesto. Recuperado de: http:// altmetrics.org/manifesto/
Priem, J.; Costello, K. L. (2010). How and why scholars cite on Twitter. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 47(1), 1-4. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/YoRRQd. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504701201
Priem, J.; Hemminger, B. H. (2010).Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday, vol. 15(7). Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/5FUanH
Robinson García, N.; Delgado López-Cózar, E.; Torres Salinas, D. (2011). Cómo comunicar y diseminar información científica en Internet para obtener mayor visibilidad e impacto. Aula Abierta, vol. 39(3), 41-50. Recuperado de: http://hdl.handle.net/10481/19199
Shuai, X.; Pepe, A.; Bollen, J. (2012). How the scientific community reacts to newly submitted preprints: Article downloads, twitter mentions, and citations. PLoSONE, vol. 7(11). Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/Wz2iam.
Sud, P.; Thelwall, M. (2014). Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics, vol. 98(2), 1131-1143. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/lfvNmZ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1117-2
The British Psychological Society. (2013). Ethics Guidelines for Internet-mediated Research. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/8g2TxL
Thelwall, M.; Haustein, S.; Larivière, V.; Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLoSONE, vol. 8(5). Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/35if4i.
Torres Salinas, D.; Cabezas Clavijo, Á.; Jiménez Contreras, E. (2013). Altmetrics: nuevos indicadores para la comunicación científica en la Web 2.0. Comunicar, vol. 21(41), 53-60. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/3bJa1n. https://doi.org/10.3916/c41-2013-05
Torres Salinas, D.; Robinson García, N.; Cabezas Clavijo, A. (2012), Compartir los datos de investigación en ciencia: introducción al data sharing. El Profesional de la Información, vol. 21(2), 173-184. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/Rjlkai. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2012.mar.08
Torres Salinas, D.; Milanés Guisado, Y. (2014). Presencia en redes sociales y altmétricas de los principales autores de la revista "El Profesional de la Información". El Profesional de la Información, vol. 23(4), 367-372. Recuperado de: http://hdl.handle.net/10481/32932. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2014.jul.04
Torres Salinas, D.; Martín Martín, A.; Fuente Gutiérrez, E. (2014). Analysis of the coverage of the Data Citation Index–Thomson Reuters: disciplines, document types and repositories. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, vol. 37(1). Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/CyvW8d.
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight "bigtent" criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 16(10), 837-851. Recuperado de: http://goo.gl/qsoFZ9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
Weller, K.; Dröge, E.; Puschmann, C. (2011). Citation Analysis in Twitter: Approaches for Defining and Measuring Information Flows within Tweets during Scientific Conferences. 1st Workshop on Making Sense of Microposts. Recuperado de: http://journal.webscience.org/500/1/153_paper.pdf
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
