Comments on: Scientists Use Social Media http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/ What's Hot & What's Cooking in Scholarly Publishing - from the Society for Scholarly Publishing Thu, 02 Sep 2010 11:43:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: FundScience Enters Social Media | fundscience.org http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-3625 FundScience Enters Social Media | fundscience.org Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:48:31 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-3625 [...] Scientists Use Social Media (via The Scholarly Kitchen) [...] [...] Scientists Use Social Media (via The Scholarly Kitchen) [...]

]]> By: FreshNetworks Blog » Blog Archive » When did we start trusting strangers? New research from Universal McCann http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-945 FreshNetworks Blog » Blog Archive » When did we start trusting strangers? New research from Universal McCann Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:30:37 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-945 [...] Scientists Use Social Media [...] [...] Scientists Use Social Media [...]

]]> By: Sarah T http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-875 Sarah T Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:20:21 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-875 BioInformatics recently published an extended ebook on this study available for download here: http://lifesciencesocialmedia.com/. If I remember correctly, this is the compressed version of a much longer report that they put out at a later date. BioInformatics recently published an extended ebook on this study available for download here: http://lifesciencesocialmedia.com/. If I remember correctly, this is the compressed version of a much longer report that they put out at a later date.

]]> By: bookwormhub http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-705 bookwormhub Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:08:22 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-705 This is an informative post. Scientists of the modern times utilize these social networking sites to share their ideas and researches even to ordinary people. This is an informative post.

Scientists of the modern times utilize these social networking sites to share their ideas and researches even to ordinary people.

]]> By: Philip Davis http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-704 Philip Davis Fri, 15 Aug 2008 01:08:52 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-704 We often assume that the point of social networking is to make connections and share information, which can lead to fruitful outcomes like a new job. Yet, if you look at the way social networking sites are being used, they function more as <i>identity formation</i> than anything else. For instance: 1. These are the people who I think are cool <i>(inference: you should therefore think that I’m cool too.)</i> 2. These are the bands I listen to, the books I read, the colleges I attended, the political parties I ascribe to <i>(inference: this my public version of identity.)</i> Danah Boyd explores the meaning of "Friend" in social networks Its a very enjoyable read. See: Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites <i>First Monday</i> (Volume 11, Number 12 — 4 December 2006) http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/boyd/index.html We often assume that the point of social networking is to make connections and share information, which can lead to fruitful outcomes like a new job. Yet, if you look at the way social networking sites are being used, they function more as identity formation than anything else. For instance:

1. These are the people who I think are cool (inference: you should therefore think that I’m cool too.)

2. These are the bands I listen to, the books I read, the colleges I attended, the political parties I ascribe to (inference: this my public version of identity.)

Danah Boyd explores the meaning of “Friend” in social networks Its a very enjoyable read. See:

Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites
First Monday (Volume 11, Number 12 — 4 December 2006)
http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/boyd/index.html

]]> By: Christina Pikas http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-700 Christina Pikas Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:13:53 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-700 I'm somewhat skeptical of the 2Collab survey - I did contact the media person and to get a copy... the copy they provided was a pdf of a powerpoint. I asked for more information - and they gave more demographics (strangely - only 5.6% of respondents from the US, 3.3% from the UK and from Mexico, 12.8% from China) but they didn't give me the survey instrument ... and based on the actual instrument questions used in the Mark Ware Consulting [2008] study, I don't take the wording for granted. Also the population they sampled from is researchers who have created individual logins - and this number is really low at my institution AFAIK... maybe you have more information? I’m somewhat skeptical of the 2Collab survey – I did contact the media person and to get a copy… the copy they provided was a pdf of a powerpoint. I asked for more information – and they gave more demographics (strangely – only 5.6% of respondents from the US, 3.3% from the UK and from Mexico, 12.8% from China) but they didn’t give me the survey instrument … and based on the actual instrument questions used in the Mark Ware Consulting [2008] study, I don’t take the wording for granted. Also the population they sampled from is researchers who have created individual logins – and this number is really low at my institution AFAIK… maybe you have more information?

]]> By: David Crotty http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/08/14/scientists-use-social-media/#comment-699 David Crotty Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:02:53 +0000 http://scholarlykitchen.wordpress.com/?p=633#comment-699 As Jakob Nielsen always says, there are huge differences between what users say they want and what they actually do online, so I tend to take a lot of these comments with that in mind, and instead try to focus on what people are actually doing. I'm curious how skewed their data is, as questioning a selection of users of an online service about online services may not give a balanced picture of the mainstream. Those surveyed may have already "drunk the kool-aid" as it were. That said, you've hit the nail on the head as far as addressing how poorly most of the social networking sites integrate into the normal science workflow. Most are just attempts to shoehorn things that have worked in other contexts. And most demand that the users change their behavior, and that the scientific culture adapt to the tools, rather than creating tools that are adapted to the culture. The SciTechNet(sm) blog has been running a list lately of all the entrants in the "social networking for scientists" arena: http://scitechnet.blogspot.com/ It's impressive how many are jumping in here, creating an overcrowded market which is a big barrier to adoption: http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2008/08/07/the-many-challenges-of-the-social-media-industry/ "Low barriers to entry make competition cut throat: Commodity software is always a concern, and when this occurs, there are so many entrants the market is confused –unable to determine who to purchase from, and competitors may eat into each others margins. Take for example the crowded community platform space (aka white label social networking) industry that has over 100 vendors –all offering very similar software." As Jakob Nielsen always says, there are huge differences between what users say they want and what they actually do online, so I tend to take a lot of these comments with that in mind, and instead try to focus on what people are actually doing. I’m curious how skewed their data is, as questioning a selection of users of an online service about online services may not give a balanced picture of the mainstream. Those surveyed may have already “drunk the kool-aid” as it were.

That said, you’ve hit the nail on the head as far as addressing how poorly most of the social networking sites integrate into the normal science workflow. Most are just attempts to shoehorn things that have worked in other contexts. And most demand that the users change their behavior, and that the scientific culture adapt to the tools, rather than creating tools that are adapted to the culture.

The SciTechNet(sm) blog has been running a list lately of all the entrants in the “social networking for scientists” arena:
http://scitechnet.blogspot.com/
It’s impressive how many are jumping in here, creating an overcrowded market which is a big barrier to adoption:
http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2008/08/07/the-many-challenges-of-the-social-media-industry/
“Low barriers to entry make competition cut throat:
Commodity software is always a concern, and when this occurs, there are so many entrants the market is confused –unable to determine who to purchase from, and competitors may eat into each others margins. Take for example the crowded community platform space (aka white label social networking) industry that has over 100 vendors –all offering very similar software.”

]]>