“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites
PurposeScholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential librar...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of documentation 2020-10, Vol.76 (6), p.1233-1260 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1260 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1233 |
container_title | Journal of documentation |
container_volume | 76 |
creator | Radford, Marie L Kitzie, Vanessa Mikitish, Stephanie Floegel, Diana Radford, Gary P Connaway, Lynn Silipigni |
description | PurposeScholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.Design/methodology/approachData from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.FindingsResults reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.Research limitations/implicationsThis exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.Social implicationsResults highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.Originality/valueThis research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1108/JD-04-2019-0074 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_emera</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2444374303</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2444374303</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-ea014036a4cd476cfdd7cbfe1cfe063e5898ba46be73084a143888379374efbc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkLtOwzAUhi0EEqUws1piJe1x7MbOiFpuVSUQgtlynBNISZNip0LZ-iDwcn0SHJUFiekM5__O5SPknMGIMVDj-SwCEcXA0ghAigMyYHKiIsllekgGAHEc-kwdkxPvlwAsNNSAPO22X4_YrCukxiF1aPKyfqVds3H0s3Hvl7vtN_X2ramMqzpa5li3ZdtRU-fUN7Y0Fa2x7ZM95ssW_Sk5Kkzl8ey3DsnLzfXz9C5aPNzeT68WkeUibSM0wATwxAibC5nYIs-lzQpktkBIOE5UqjIjkgwlByUME1wpFb7hUmCRWT4kF_u5a9d8bNC3ehmursNKHQshQowDD6nxPmVd473DQq9duTKu0wx0L07PZxqE7sXpXlwgRnsCV-hMlf8D_DHNfwA2THBw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2444374303</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Emerald Journals</source><creator>Radford, Marie L ; Kitzie, Vanessa ; Mikitish, Stephanie ; Floegel, Diana ; Radford, Gary P ; Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</creator><creatorcontrib>Radford, Marie L ; Kitzie, Vanessa ; Mikitish, Stephanie ; Floegel, Diana ; Radford, Gary P ; Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</creatorcontrib><description>PurposeScholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.Design/methodology/approachData from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.FindingsResults reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.Research limitations/implicationsThis exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.Social implicationsResults highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.Originality/valueThis research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0418</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1758-7379</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/JD-04-2019-0074</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bradford: Emerald Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>Academic libraries ; Benefits ; Bibliometrics ; College faculty ; Communication (Thought Transfer) ; Digital media ; Doctoral Students ; Faculty Promotion ; Goffman, Erving (1922-1982) ; Identity ; Impression management ; Informetrics ; Internet ; Librarians ; Libraries ; Library Personnel ; Literature Reviews ; Professional development ; Researchers ; Scholarly communication ; Social media ; Social networks ; Social research ; Students</subject><ispartof>Journal of documentation, 2020-10, Vol.76 (6), p.1233-1260</ispartof><rights>Emerald Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Emerald Publishing Limited 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-ea014036a4cd476cfdd7cbfe1cfe063e5898ba46be73084a143888379374efbc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-ea014036a4cd476cfdd7cbfe1cfe063e5898ba46be73084a143888379374efbc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JD-04-2019-0074/full/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,961,11615,27323,27903,27904,33753,52667</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Radford, Marie L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitzie, Vanessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mikitish, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Floegel, Diana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radford, Gary P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</creatorcontrib><title>“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites</title><title>Journal of documentation</title><description>PurposeScholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.Design/methodology/approachData from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.FindingsResults reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.Research limitations/implicationsThis exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.Social implicationsResults highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.Originality/valueThis research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians.</description><subject>Academic libraries</subject><subject>Benefits</subject><subject>Bibliometrics</subject><subject>College faculty</subject><subject>Communication (Thought Transfer)</subject><subject>Digital media</subject><subject>Doctoral Students</subject><subject>Faculty Promotion</subject><subject>Goffman, Erving (1922-1982)</subject><subject>Identity</subject><subject>Impression management</subject><subject>Informetrics</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Librarians</subject><subject>Libraries</subject><subject>Library Personnel</subject><subject>Literature Reviews</subject><subject>Professional development</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Scholarly communication</subject><subject>Social media</subject><subject>Social networks</subject><subject>Social research</subject><subject>Students</subject><issn>0022-0418</issn><issn>1758-7379</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><recordid>eNptkLtOwzAUhi0EEqUws1piJe1x7MbOiFpuVSUQgtlynBNISZNip0LZ-iDwcn0SHJUFiekM5__O5SPknMGIMVDj-SwCEcXA0ghAigMyYHKiIsllekgGAHEc-kwdkxPvlwAsNNSAPO22X4_YrCukxiF1aPKyfqVds3H0s3Hvl7vtN_X2ramMqzpa5li3ZdtRU-fUN7Y0Fa2x7ZM95ssW_Sk5Kkzl8ey3DsnLzfXz9C5aPNzeT68WkeUibSM0wATwxAibC5nYIs-lzQpktkBIOE5UqjIjkgwlByUME1wpFb7hUmCRWT4kF_u5a9d8bNC3ehmursNKHQshQowDD6nxPmVd473DQq9duTKu0wx0L07PZxqE7sXpXlwgRnsCV-hMlf8D_DHNfwA2THBw</recordid><startdate>20201005</startdate><enddate>20201005</enddate><creator>Radford, Marie L</creator><creator>Kitzie, Vanessa</creator><creator>Mikitish, Stephanie</creator><creator>Floegel, Diana</creator><creator>Radford, Gary P</creator><creator>Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</creator><general>Emerald Publishing Limited</general><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CNYFK</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>E3H</scope><scope>F2A</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M1O</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201005</creationdate><title>“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites</title><author>Radford, Marie L ; Kitzie, Vanessa ; Mikitish, Stephanie ; Floegel, Diana ; Radford, Gary P ; Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-ea014036a4cd476cfdd7cbfe1cfe063e5898ba46be73084a143888379374efbc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Academic libraries</topic><topic>Benefits</topic><topic>Bibliometrics</topic><topic>College faculty</topic><topic>Communication (Thought Transfer)</topic><topic>Digital media</topic><topic>Doctoral Students</topic><topic>Faculty Promotion</topic><topic>Goffman, Erving (1922-1982)</topic><topic>Identity</topic><topic>Impression management</topic><topic>Informetrics</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Librarians</topic><topic>Libraries</topic><topic>Library Personnel</topic><topic>Literature Reviews</topic><topic>Professional development</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Scholarly communication</topic><topic>Social media</topic><topic>Social networks</topic><topic>Social research</topic><topic>Students</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Radford, Marie L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitzie, Vanessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mikitish, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Floegel, Diana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radford, Gary P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Library & Information Sciences Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Library Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Journal of documentation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Radford, Marie L</au><au>Kitzie, Vanessa</au><au>Mikitish, Stephanie</au><au>Floegel, Diana</au><au>Radford, Gary P</au><au>Connaway, Lynn Silipigni</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>“People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites</atitle><jtitle>Journal of documentation</jtitle><date>2020-10-05</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>76</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1233</spage><epage>1260</epage><pages>1233-1260</pages><issn>0022-0418</issn><eissn>1758-7379</eissn><abstract>PurposeScholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.Design/methodology/approachData from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.FindingsResults reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.Research limitations/implicationsThis exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.Social implicationsResults highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.Originality/valueThis research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians.</abstract><cop>Bradford</cop><pub>Emerald Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/JD-04-2019-0074</doi><tpages>28</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-0418 |
ispartof | Journal of documentation, 2020-10, Vol.76 (6), p.1233-1260 |
issn | 0022-0418 1758-7379 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2444374303 |
source | Sociological Abstracts; Emerald Journals |
subjects | Academic libraries Benefits Bibliometrics College faculty Communication (Thought Transfer) Digital media Doctoral Students Faculty Promotion Goffman, Erving (1922-1982) Identity Impression management Informetrics Internet Librarians Libraries Library Personnel Literature Reviews Professional development Researchers Scholarly communication Social media Social networks Social research Students |
title | “People are reading your work,” scholarly identity and social networking sites |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T00%3A42%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_emera&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%E2%80%9CPeople%20are%20reading%20your%20work,%E2%80%9D%20scholarly%20identity%20and%20social%20networking%20sites&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20documentation&rft.au=Radford,%20Marie%20L&rft.date=2020-10-05&rft.volume=76&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1233&rft.epage=1260&rft.pages=1233-1260&rft.issn=0022-0418&rft.eissn=1758-7379&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/JD-04-2019-0074&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_emera%3E2444374303%3C/proquest_emera%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2444374303&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |