User participation in an academic social networking service: A survey of open group users on Mendeley

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 66, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 890-904

  Jeng, Wei ^a   He, Daqing ^a   Jiang, Jiepu ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b The Manning College of Information and Computer Sciences   (United States)

Author keywords

information use; scholarly communication; social networking

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION USE; JOINING; MOTIVATION; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

ACADEMIC SOCIAL NETWORKINGS; INCENTIVE MECHANISM; ONLINE SURVEYS; SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION; SOCIAL ACTIVITIES; SOCIAL NETWORKING SERVICES; SOCIAL-BASED; USER PARTICIPATION;

SURVEYS;

EID: 84938867251     PISSN: 23301635     EISSN: 23301643     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.23225     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., &, Terliesner, J., (2012). Beyond citations: Scholars' visibility on the social web. In, Archambault E., Gingras Y., &, Larivière V., (Eds.), The 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI2012) (pp. 98-109). Montréal, Canada: Science-Metrix and OST.
2. Bateman, P., Gray, P., &, Butler, B., (2006). Community commitment: How affect, obligation, and necessity drive online behaviors. International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2006) (pp. 983-1000).
3. Borgman, C.L., (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Issues in science technology librarianship (Vol. 57, p. 336). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Borrego, A., &, Fry, J., (2012). Measuring researchers' use of scholarly information through social bookmarking data: A case study of BibSonomy. Journal of Information Science, 38 (3), 297-308.
5. Bullinger, A.C., Hallerstede, S.H., Renken, U., Soeldner, J.-H., &, Moeslein, K.M., (2010). Towards research collaboration-A taxonomy of social research network sites. Proceedings of the 16th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Paper 92. Lima, Peru.
6. Butler, B., Sproull, L., Kiesler, S., &, Kraut, R., (2002). Community effort in online groups: Who does the work and why? Leadership at a Distance, 54 (2), 346-362.
7. Case, D.O., (2006). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Academic Press.
8. Cohen, D., (2007). Zotero: Social and Semantic Computing for Historical Scholarship. Perspectives Online, 45 (5). Retrieved from http://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/may-2007/history-and-the-changing-landscape-of-information/zotero-social-and-semantic-computing-for-historical-scholarship
9. Cummings, J., Sproull, L., &, Kiesler, S., (2002). Beyond hearing: Where real world and online support meet. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6 (1), 78-88.
10. 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, 13 (4), e123.
11. Gruzd, A., (2012). Non-academic and academic social networking sites for online scholarly communication. In, D.R. Neal, (Ed.), Social media for academics: A practical guide (pp. 21-37). Oxford, United Kingdom: Chandos.
12. Hinds, P.J., &, Pfeffer, J., (2003). Why organizations don't "know what they know": Cognitive and motivational factors affecting the transfer of expertise. In, M.S. Ackerman, V. Pipek, &, V. Wulf, (Eds.), Sharing expertise beyond knowledge management (pp. 3-26). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Jeng, W., He, D., Jiang, J., &, Zhang, Y., (2012), Groups in Mendeley: Owners' descriptions and group outcomes. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49, 1-4.
14. Kanfer, R., Chen, G., &, Pritchard, R., (2008). Work motivation: Forging new perspectives and directions in the post-millennium. In, R. Kanfer, G. Chen, &, R.D. Pritchard, (Eds.), Work motivation: Past, present, and future (pp. 601-632). New York, NY: Routledge.
15. Kelly, B., &, Delasalle, J., (2012) Can LinkedIn and academia.edu enhance access to open repositories? In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Open Repositories (OR2012), Edinburgh, Scotland.
16. Kietzmann, J.H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I.P., &, Silvestre, B.S., (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54 (3), 241-251.
17. Kogan, M., (2000). Higher education communities and academic identity. Higher Education Quarterly, 54 (3), 207-216.
18. Krause, J., (2012). Tracking reference with social media tools: Orgnizing what you've read or want to read. In, D.R. Neal, (Ed.), Social media for academics: A practical guide (pp. 85-104). Oxford, United Kingdom: Chandos.
19. Laird, T.F.N., Shoup, R., Kuh, G.D., &, Schwarz, M.J., (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49 (6), 469-494.
20. Lampe, C., Wash, R., Velasquez, A., &, Ozkaya, E., (2010, April). Motivations to participate in online communities. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (SIGCHI) conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1927-1936).
21. Lampel, J., &, Bhalla, A., (2007). The role of status seeking in online communities: Giving the gift of experience. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12 (2), 434-455.
22. Latham, G.P., &, Pinder, C.C., (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56 (1), 485-516.
23. Leahey, E., (2007). Not by productivity alone: How visibility and specialization contribute to academic earnings. American Sociological Review, 72 (4), 533-561.
24. Letierce, J., Passant, A., Breslin, J., &, Decker, S., (2010). Understanding how Twitter is used to widely spread scientific messages. In Proceedings of the Search Results Web Science Conference 2010, Paper 79.
25. Li, X., Thelwall, M., &, Giustini, D., (2012). Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics, 91 (2), 461-471.
26. Meho, L.I., &, Tibbo, H.R., (2003). Modeling the information-seeking behavior of social scientists: Ellis's study revisited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54 (6), 570-587.
27. Oh, J., &, Jeng, W., (2011). Groups in academic social networking services-An exploration of their potential as a platform for multi-disciplinary collaboration. In IEEE Third International Conference on Social Computing (pp. 545-548), Boston, MA.
28. Palmer, J., (1991). Scientists and information: I. Using cluster analysis to identify information style. Journal of Documentation, 47 (2), 105-129.
29. Porter, C.E., (2004). A typology of virtual communities: A multi-disciplinary foundation for future research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10 (1).
30. Priem, J., &, Costello, K.L., (2010). How and why scholars cite on Twitter. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47 (1), 1-4.
31. Priem J, Piwowar H.A., &, Hemminger B.M., (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. ArXiv.org. Retrieved from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745.
32. Rogers, B. M., (2008). The historical community and the digital future. The 3rd Annual James A. Rawley Conference in the Humanities.
33. Schleyer, T., Spallek, H,., Butler, B. S, Subramanian, S., Weiss, D., Poythress, M. L., Rattanathikun, P., Mueller, G., (2008) Facebook for scientists: Requirements and services for optimizing how scientific collaborations are established. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 10 (3), e24.
34. Shema, H., Bar-Ilan, J., &, Thelwall, M., (2014), Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations? Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65, 1018-1027. doi: 10.1002/asi.23037
35. Skeels, M.M., &, Grudin, J., (2009). When social networks cross boundaries: A case study of workplace use of Facebook and LinkedIn. Group, 10 (3), 95-103.
36. Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., &, Sugimoto, C.R., (2013). Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLOS ONE, 8 (5), e64841.
37. Thij, E.T., (2007). Online communities: Exploring classification approaches using participants' perspectives. In Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Web Based Communities (pp. 18-26).
38. Veletsianos, G., &, Kimmons, R., (2011). Networked Participatory Scholarship: Emergent techno-cultural pressures toward open and digital scholarship in online networks. Computers & Education, 58 (2), 766-774.
39. Weber, G.M., Barnett, W., Conlon, M., Eichmann, D., Kibbe, W., Falk-Krzesinski, H.,., Kahlon, M., (2011). Direct2Experts: A pilot national network to demonstrate interoperability among research-networking platforms. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 18 (1), i157-i160.
40. Weller, K., Dornstädter, R., Freimanis, R., Klein, R.N., &, Perez, M., (2010). Social software in academia: Three studies on users' acceptance of Web 2.0 Services. In Proceedings of the Web Science Conference. Retrieved from: http://journal.webscience.org/2360/.
41. Weller, K., &, Puschmann, C., (2011). Twitter for scientific communication: How can citations/references be identified and measured. In Proceedings of the Web Science Conference. Retrieved from: http://journal.webscience.org/500/1/153-paper.pdf
42. Zaugg, H., West, R.E., Tateishi, I., &, Randall, D.L., (2011). Mendeley: Creating communities of scholarly inquiry through research collaboration. TechTrends, 55 (1), 32-36.