1. David Nicholas, Ian Rowlands and Deanna Wamae
Thursday 4 November 2010
XXX Annual Charleston Conference
Charleston Observatory 2010
Are social media impacting on research?
1

2. 2
David Nicholas
CIBER University College London
2

3. About the Charleston Observatory
Engaging the library and publishing communities
The Observatory, established in 2009, is a
mechanism by which the exciting ideas raised
at the Charleston Conference can be
researched and the results reported back to
provide continuity and build.
It is a place where evidence can be collected
globally in a robust manner and where all the
key information stakeholders (librarians,
publishers, agents and academics) can come
together and share data for the benefit of all.
The Observatory's first project, sponsored by
ebrary and Baker & Taylor and undertaken by
CIBER, was the impact of the world-wide
recession on libraries. The research received
widespread acclaim and was in published in a
number of international journals and cited in
The Scientist. The topic this year, social media
and how they are impacting research practice
is just as big.
3
3

4. Aims of this study
Understanding social media and research workflow
Aims
Are social media impacting upon researcher
workflows?
If so, how should publishers and librarians
respond?
How influential are age and other factors in
shaping the demand for social media?
Research design
Online survey
Focus group interviews (next stage)
4
4

5. About the survey
A global survey of facts and opinions
Research partner and sponsor
Emerald
List contributors
Cambridge University Press
Charleston Conference
Taylor & Francis
University College London
Wolters Kluwer
Key facts
4,012 people in 215 countries in arts and
humanities, business, and the natural,
physical and social sciences responded.
This is probably the biggest survey of social
media researcher behaviour yet undertaken.
5
5

6. 6
Ian Rowlands
CIBER University College London
6

7. Most popular social media in research
A big gap between awareness and use
How to read this graphic
This chart shows the percentage of
researchers within each software
category and their use and
awareness of various tools.
Key findings
There is a big gap between
awareness (orange) and actual use
(green) in all eight categories.
With one exception - collaborative
authoring - social media have not
yet made big inroads into researcher
workflows.
Collaborative authoring
Conferencing
Scheduling
Social networking
Image sharing
Blogging
Microblogging
Social tagging 55.6
24.6
29.6
9.8
11.9
25.2
8.7
8.7
36.8
67.8
57.4
71.7
65.0
41.8
53.7
40.6
7.6
7.6
12.9
18.6
23.1
33.0
37.6
50.8
Yes, I have used in my research No, but I am aware of these tools
No, I don’t know anything about these tools
People like me need
to be persuaded of the added
benefits of Web 2.0 before we are
prepared to invest in learning
these skills.
I definitely see their potential
but they aren’t necessarily
essential …
7
7

8. Most popular social media in research
Generic services rule
Key findings
Researchers tended to mention well known free
generic products (like Skype, Google Docs and
YouTube) rather than bespoke tools developed
specifically for the academic market, like
Mendeley or CiteULike. A triumph of marketing
over content? A gap in the market for simple to
use bespoke tools?
How to read this graphic
Respondents were asked which tools they used
most often in their research.
The font sizes opposite are scaled to the number
of mentions for the top 24 products.
The main problem is
that there are just so many
different options all developing so fast
that it is simply bewildering and not worth
the effort of setting up anything unless it
is secure, permanent and broadly
accepted.
We don’t need monolithic branded
platforms,we need small simple tools that
are in open format.
8
8

9. The research life cycle
Where do social media fit?
My way of doing
research has changed
enormously since the advent of Web
2.0. I cannot imagine doing
research or teaching without it.
The challenge for
us all is to find the best
Web 2.0 tools to use, and to
remember that they are
there!
We need to make sure
that academic research does not
gather dust in old books at a library,
but rather seamlessly blend with the
people who make it, the people who
will benefit from it, and the people
who will read it
I think people are too afraid
somebody will steal their ideas and
they’re too stressed about starting to
use this available technology.
There seems to be a
presumption that because you
can, you must ...
The flood of
technology and the often
lack of support, force scholars
to be their own tech support
or be left behind
9
9

10. The research life cycle
Social networking ticks lots of boxes
Key findings
Social networking clearly offers a lot more
than just another channel for
disseminating research findings.
Researchers find these tools useful across
the research life cycle, with the exception
of analysing research data.
How to read this graphic
This table shows the most popular (modal)
responses to a series of questions about how
useful researchers find social networking at
different points in the research life cycle.
Social networking and the research life cycle
modal values
Identify research
opportunities
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Find collaborators
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Secure support
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Reviewing the literature
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Collecting research data
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Analysing research data
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Disseminating research
findings
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
Manage the research
process
Not at all
useful
Somewhat
useful
Very
useful
Extremely
useful
10
10

11. The research life cycle
Social media find broad application in the research life cycle
How to read this graphic
This is basically a Word table with colours
representing how useful researchers find
the tools (the columns) at each stage of
the research life cycle (the rows). Green is
very useful, amber and red less so.
Key findings
This composite picture shows that social
media find broad application across the
research life cycle (lots of green and
amber) and generally in ways that we
would expect, like e-conferencing being
used to support research collaboration
and management.
Looking across the rows, there appears to
be a real need for simple tools to support
the analysis of research data and perhaps
easier ways to identify grants.Not at all useful Somewhat useful Very useful Extremely useful11
11

12. Perceived social media benefits
Does visibility drive esteem?
Key findings
The main perceived benefits (ease of
communication across national borders, quickly
and to a wider audience) are no surprise.
There is little consensus around whether social
media help to deliver greater esteem or more
citations as a result of higher digital visibility.
How to read this graphic
The numbers opposite are average agreement
ratings on a scale where 1=Strongly disagree
and 5=Strongly agree.
Communicate internationally
Faster dissemination
Connect with people outside the academy
Ability to target research communities
Greater access to research content
Ability to cross disciplinary divides
Attract more citations
Greater esteem through higher visibility 3.54
3.57
3.84
3.92
3.95
4.05
4.07
4.23
I doubt that Darwin’s
thoughts would have been
greatly improved by
twittering
I have very little trust in things published
on the web from open sources unless I know the
person. There are too many hidden agendas.
12
12

13. Social media drivers
A curiosity-driven phenomenon
Key findings
Take up of social media seems to be mainly
driven by curiosity.
Management initiatives feature much less highly.
It’s a jungle out there!
How to read this graphic
The numbers opposite are average ratings on a
scale where 0=Not at all influential and
4=Extremely influential.
Personal initiative
Technology
Need for speed
Peers outside my institution
Colleagues at my institution
Students
Management 2.45
2.63
2.68
2.81
2.93
2.99
3.25
I’ve used dozens of tools over the
years and there are very few `keepers’ … I
wouldn’t hesitate to experiment with something
new if circumstances called for it.
I use them because I’m stuck using a
computer for much of my work and it’s
sometimes nice to take a break.
13
13

14. Social media enthusiasts
Differences by age group
Key findings
There are real differences between the age
groups with regard to their use of social media,
but the picture is complex.
This does not surprise CIBER, we have been
saying for years that age-related differences in
information behaviour are not simply explained
by age.
The future is now!
How to read this graphic
The numbers opposite are the percentages within
each age band that use selected social media in
their research.
14
25 and under 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 65 and over
2.4
7.3
8.0
10.9
10.5
6.1
12.0
13.6
14.1
15.9
14.4
18.2
15.7
24.2
32.2
26.3
27.6
19.7
social networking blogging microblogging
14

15. What users want from publishers
Sort out data formats
Key findings
Researchers want the basics put in order, starting
with the ability to read any content on any
platform. They also want to dig deeper than the
article by accessing the source data.
There is little enthusiasm for `bells and whistles’
like multilingual capability or RSS feeds.
How to read this graphic
The pie chart shows how researchers voted when
asked to single out one of the recommendations
opposite as their highest priority for publisher
action.
Multilingual
capabilities
6.3%
Content readable
on all platforms
42.8%
RSS as standard
6.4%
Greater use of
multimedia
11.2%
Links to the data
behind the
published article
33.4%
I would prefer not to see publishers offer their
own [tools], because this causes lock-in to a particular
platform and raises copyright issues.
… anything that publishers and database
providers can do to raise the profile of published articles
is much appreciated.
15
15

16. What users want from libraries
Make the library more like Google
Key findings
Researchers are very keen on the idea that
libraries should provide deep indexing of the full
text of their licensed content.
There is relatively little user interest in the library
preserving and curating social media content.
About this graphic
As in the previous slide, this pie chart shows the
percentage breakdown of respondents who
chose that recommendation as their single
highest priority.
Index full text library holdings
56.4%
Socially tag library
catalogue
11.7%
Catalogue
Web 2.0 content
9.8%
Preserve
Web 2.0
content
7.9%
Add a social
network interface
to the library
catalogue
14.2%
I find myself wondering about how long these
various systems will be around and if I will loose the data
I have developed in them.
… all of the supposed valued added features
tend to be more troublesome and distracting than
helpful. The tail is starting to wag the dog.
16
16

17. What users want from libraries
Make the library more like Google
Index full text library holdings
56.4%
Socially tag library
catalogue
11.7%
Add a social
network interface
to the library
catalogue
14.2%
17
17

18. 18
Deanna Wamae
Emerald Inc., Boston MA
18

19. Let’s keep things in perspective
Key findings
People haven’t migrated to mobile devices for
research work in great numbers. Access is
still predominantly through static devices like
laptops or as publisher hard copy.
How to read this graphic
Each bar adds up to 100 per cent and shows the
relative frequency with which researchers access
scholarly content from different devices.
Desktop or laptop
Publisher hard copy
Netbook
Smartphone or mobile device
iPad
19
All of the time Most of the time Sometimes
Rarely Never
19

20. Traditional formats are still strongly preferred
Key findings
Faculty continue to back dissemination
routes that they know and trust.
Personal dissemination activities are
growing.
How to read this graphic
These are summary answers to the question
‘How important are the following methods for
disseminating or publicising your research?’
where 1=Not at all important and 4=Extremely
important
Academic journals
Conference proceedings
Edited books
Wikis or blogs
Social networking
Microblogging 1.9
2.1
2.2
3.1
3.2
3.8
20
20

21. The change zone
Greater use of
multimedia
11.2%
21
Collaborative authoring
Conferencing
Scheduling
Social networking
Image sharing
Blogging
Microblogging
Social tagging 55.6
24.6
29.6
9.8
11.9
25.2
8.7
8.7
7.6
7.6
12.9
18.6
23.1
33.0
37.6
50.8
Yes, I have used in my research No, but I am aware of these tools
No, I don’t know anything about these tools
Key questions
The green are the early adopters –
where are the yellow zone going?
That is the question for both
librarians and publishers.
Which areas will grow fastest?
Is blogging and social tagging
always going to be a minority
activity?
What will be the preference for
social media tools? Mainstream or
specialist? Utility will determine
adoption.
The
researcher
of the
future?
21

22. Emerging technology preferences
Key findings
The overwhelming preference is for
mainstream anchor technologies – libraries
and publishers need adapt to the winning
technologies.
There will be challenges in linking to content
and for relevant industry standards.
Greater use of
multimedia
11.2%
22
22

23. Emerging research preferences
Observations
There are real benefits where social media
support the research process. The core of
the research process is not well supported
by social media.
There are opportunities for the development
of research workflow tools.
We see publication moving from journal
issues to article release.
Greater use of
multimedia
11.2%
23
How to read this graphic
This graphic identifies the pulse points as far as
social media are concerned. These are the
three areas where our respondents found social
media to be very or extremely useful overall.
23

24. Some early conclusions
Most researchers currently use at least one social media tool in their research
Web 2.0 use is mainly curiosity-driven than actively managed or supported
Lack of time and distrust of crowd-sourced information are big barriers to use
There is a large gap between awareness and actual use
For a large minority, however, social media are useful at all stages of the research life cycle
The age profile of social media use is complex and there is no clear `digital native’ effect
Researchers want publishers to focus on the basics, not more `bells and whistles’
Researchers would love to be able to search across licensed library full text content using a
simple search engine, like Google.
24
24

25. Core themes
Proven dissemination approaches are still
working well, but ...
Opportunities: social media may present
some opportunities for better, faster
research and dissemination.
Challenges: librarians and publishers need
to engage and support users within and
around the technologies that they value.
25

26. Some early conclusions
Most researchers currently use at least one social media tool in their research
Web 2.0 use is mainly curiosity-driven than actively managed or supported
Lack of time and distrust of crowd-sourced information are big barriers to use
There is a large gap between awareness and actual use
For a large minority, however, social media are useful at all stages of the research life cycle
The age profile of social media use is complex and there is no clear `digital native’ effect
Researchers want publishers to focus on the basics, not more `bells and whistles’
Researchers would love to be able to search across licensed library full text content using a
simple search engine, like Google.
26
26