首页> 外文期刊>Aslib journal of information management >Do online communities support research collaboration?
【24h】

Do online communities support research collaboration?

机译:在线社区是否支持研究协作?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which academics are engaged with online communities for research purposes, and the research activities, platforms and tools associated with these communities. In addition, the paper aims to discover the benefits, disadvantages and barriers involved in the use of online communities, and especially in regard to the trust and authority issues, so important in scholarly communications. Design/methodology/approach - A layered, mixed-methods approach was used for this complex research topic. Interviews were undertaken with social science and humanities researchers, followed up with focus groups in both the USA and UK. This qualitative work was then followed up with an online questionnaire that generated over 1,000 responses. Findings - Over half the sample had experience of an online research community and a majority of researchers are making at least occasional use of one or more Web 2.0 services for communicating their research activity; for developing and sustaining networks and collaboration; or for finding out what others are doing. Big differences exist in membership rates according to subject, but not really by age or other demographic factors. The biggest benefit to joining an online community is the ability to seek information in one's own specialism. Younger researchers are more engaged with online communities. Research limitations/implications - The qualitative research was limited to the UK and USA. While use of online communities is now accepted by both established and younger researchers, the main ways of communicating research remain scholarly journals and books. Practical implications - The implications for learned societies and publishers are not clear. Journals are confirmed as the primary way of disseminating research. However, it would be easy for these stakeholders to miss how younger researchers expect to connect in digital communities. Social implications - With researchers of all ages accepting the existing and importance of online communities and connections, there are few technical or social barriers to using mainstream digital tools to connect professionally. Originality/value - There is little published research considering the role of online research communities, so the study is highly original. It is valuable to discover that researchers still prefer to share research findings primarily through journals, rather than through social technologies.
机译:目的-本文的目的是探讨学者出于研究目的与在线社区互动的程度,以及与这些社区相关的研究活动,平台和工具。此外,本文旨在发现在线社区使用中的利益,劣势和障碍,尤其是在学术交流中非常重要的信任和权威问题方面。设计/方法/方法-对于这种复杂的研究主题,使用了分层的混合方法。采访了社会科学和人文研究人员,随后是美国和英国的焦点小组。然后,通过在线问卷调查进行了定性工作,该问卷产生了1,000多个回复。调查结果-超过一半的样本具有在线研究社区的经验,大多数研究人员至少偶尔使用一种或多种Web 2.0服务来交流其研究活动;发展和维持网络与协作;或找出别人在做什么。根据主题,会员率存在很大差异,但实际上不是按年龄或其他人口统计学因素。加入在线社区的最大好处是可以根据自己的专业来查找信息。年轻的研究人员更喜欢在线社区。研究局限性/含义-定性研究仅限于英国和美国。现在,成熟的和年轻的研究人员都接受使用在线社区,但是交流研究的主要方式仍然是学术期刊和书籍。实际意义-对知识渊博的社会和出版商的意义尚不清楚。期刊被确认为传播研究的主要方式。但是,对于这些利益相关者来说,很容易错过年轻的研究人员期望如何连接数字社区。社会影响-各个年龄段的研究人员都接受在线社区和连接的存在和重要性,因此使用主流数字工具进行专业连接几乎没有技术或社会障碍。原创性/价值-考虑到在线研究社区的作用,几乎没有已发表的研究,因此该研究具有高度的原创性。值得发现的是,研究人员仍然更愿意主要通过期刊而不是通过社交技术来共享研究成果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号