This document summarizes Christina Pikas' dissertation defense on her study of how new information and communication technologies, such as blogs and Twitter, support scientific communication. Her conceptual framework examines communication in science across four elements: communication partners, purposes, message content, and communication channel. Her empirical study analyzed geoscience researchers' blog posts and tweets to understand how the technologies support functions like dissemination, discourse, and learning. She found blogs facilitate in-depth writing while Twitter enables faster interactions. The framework and study contribute to understanding how new technologies fit within scientific work and communication.

1. The role of new
Information and Communication Technologies
in information and communication in science
A conceptual framework and empirical study
Dissertation Defense
Christina K. Pikas
January 19, 2016

2. Agenda
• Review of the Study
• Research Questions
• Revised Framework
• Methods
• Summary of Data
• How do SCTs support communication in science?
• How do participants make meaning of them?
• New ICTs and information seeking and use
• Contributions
• What Next?
2

3. Given
• “Communication is the essence of science” (Garvey, 1979)
• 20 – 25% of scientists use blogs and/or Twitter
Year
Media Sample Result Reference
2008
Blogs Authors, editors, reviewers of
scholarly journals
3% have a blog
13% read blogs regularly
(Mark Ware Consulting,
2008)
2010 Blogs British researchers 16% blog occasionally or frequently
23% comment on blogs occasionally or
frequently
(Proctor et al., 2010)
2011 Twitter American and British
researchers listed on
departmental pages
2.5% are active on Twitter (Priem et al., 2011)
2014 Blogs
Twitter
Nature, Palgrave McMillan
authors, list from Web of
Science
13% STEM researchers visit Twitter
regularly
17% Earth and Environmental Science
Researchers visit Twitter regularly
(Van Noorden, 2014)
2015 Blogs American scientists 24% have blogged about science
19% follow blogs
(Pew Research Center,
2015)
3

4. What Roles do the New ICTs Play?
RQ 1. How do SCTs, blogging and microblogging, support
communication in science?
1a. What functions do they serve?
1b. How do they fit into the context of scientific work?
1c. What benefits do participants report receiving as a result of
using these new ICTs?
RQ 2. How do the participants in blogging and
microblogging make meaning of the interactions
supported by these SCTs?
2a. What value do these ICTs hold for their participants?
2b. How do participants and non-participants view these ICTs?
RQ 3. How do these ICTs support data, information, and
knowledge creation, seeking, and use in science?
4

5. Problem 1: Separate Literatures
• Separate large bodies of literature studying
communication in science
• Communication, Journalism, Linguistics, and Rhetoric
• Information Science
• Science and Technology Studies, Social Studies of Science
• These bodies are independent (rarely citing each other)
• New studies of SCTs cite little of this literature
5

6. Problem 2: SCTs Evolve Quickly
• New studies often focus on a single technology
• Users adapt technologies as they adopt them
• The uses and features of SCTs can evolve quickly as they
are adopted
• Studies of SCTs can get dated quickly
6

7. Needed: A Framework
for Understanding New ICTs
• No overall view of how these SCTs fit into what we
already know about how scientists communicate
• No grounded approach to understanding any new
SCT that comes along
7

8. Approach
Develop a comprehensive framework to
describe communication in science
that draws upon the relevant literatures
Use the framework in a study of two widely used
SCTs by scientists in one discipline to evaluate and
improve the framework and answer the research
questions.
8

9. How might this be used?
• Organizations
• Support decisions to implement (or not)
• Better engage with scientists (staff and others)
• Scientists
• Tool selection and development
• Request employer support
• Communication researchers – framework to base
new work
• Tool designers – identify gaps and suggest additions
• Librarians – useful for teaching and understanding
communication tools used by scientists
9

10. Framework
10

11. Elements of the Framework
• Features of the Communication Partners
 Number  Individual features  Match/relationship
• Purposes of the Communication Activity
• Features of the Message
 Topic  Type  Register  Language  Review/Quality control
Type: Data, Methods, Analysis, Results Theoretical, Opinion/Eval.
• Features of the Channel
11

12. Purposes
• Dissemination
• Discourse or contributing to the conversation
• Societal benefit or application
• Identity
• Rewards
• Preservation
• Certification
• Learning, teaching, or providing instruction
• Persuasion (grant applications, journal articles)
• Evaluation or opinion (peer review, grant review)
• Coordination
• Social (group membership, identity)
• Entertainment
12

13. Elements of the Framework
• Partners
• Purposes
• Content
• Channel
13

14. Channel
Elsewhere channel can mean source or format but here
used for
medium between communication partners
Three layers:
• Physical layer and basic transmission protocols
• Means of expression and advanced functions of software
• Conventions and etiquette
14

15. Channel: Physical Layer
Three categories
• Face-to-face
• Print
• Technologically mediated
Each with some of these features
• Copresence
• Visibility
• Audibility
• Cotemporality
• Simultaneity
• Sequentiality
• Reviewability
• Revisability
• Coherence
• Hyperlinking
15

16. Channel: Means of Expression
Non-Linguistic Linguistic
Auditory Sounds
Instrumental music
Spoken word
Visual Images/pictures
Models
Text
Tactile Models Braille
Other Senses (smell,
taste, proprioception)
Typically only applicable in (virtual) reality
settings.
Audiovisual,
Multimedia,
Hypermedia
Combining multiple means of expression.
16

17. Channel: Conventions
• Conventions and etiquette
Examples: Twitter’s @user, RT, and #hashtags were
developed by users before they were programmed
into the interface
17

18. Literature Based
Application
18

19. Journal Articles
1 Partners Number: Many
Match: Same
Education/Sophistication: Same; General Science
2 Purpose Dissemination (All); Certification; Preservation; Discourse;
Identity; Rewards; Learning/Teaching; Persuasion
3 Message Topic: Science content; Research Methods; Pedagogy
Type: Data; Methods; Analysis; Results; Theoretical /philosophical
Register: Formal
Structure: Stable established internal structure
Persistence: Archival
Review or Quality Control: Yes – rigor varies
4 Channel Physical: Print or Mediated Sequentiality; Reviewability;
Coherence; Hyperlinking
Expression: linguistic and non-linguistic; visual;
Conventions: Attribution/citation; Omission of false starts and
missteps; Passive voice…
19

20. Blogs
1 Partners Number: Many
Education/Sophistication: Same; General Science; Interested Public
Match: Either/Any
2 Purpose Dissemination: Discourse; Societal benefit or application; Identity;
Amplification; Learning/Teaching; Persuasion; Evaluation/Opinion;
Social (All); Entertainment
3 Message Topic: Science content; Science Education; Science Communication;
Funding; Life in Science; Job Searching; News, Commentary, etc.
Type: Methods; Analysis; Results;
Memoir/Confessional/Biographical; Theoretical/Philosophical
Register: Any
Structure: HTML/CSS tags but no internal document structure
Persistence: Typically persistent
Review or Quality Control: Rarely for personal blogs
4 Channel Physical: Mediated; Sequentiality; Reviewability; Revisability;
Coherence; Hyperlinking
Expression: Multimedia
Convention: Linking to attribute sources 20

21. Microblogs
1 Partners Number: Many
Education/Sophistication: Same; General Science; Interested Public;
General Public
Match: Either (in Education/Sophistication or Ideologically)
2 Purpose Dissemination (Discourse; Societal benefit/Application; Identity);
Learning/Teaching; Persuasion; Evaluation/Opinion; Coordination;
Social (All); Entertainment
3 Message Topic: Science content; Science Education; Science Communication;
Life in Science; Job Hunting, News, etc.
Type: Methods; Analysis; Results; Memoir/Confessional/Biographical;
Theoretical/Philosophical; Questions and Answers
Register: Typically informal, but not always
Structure: Fields but no internal structure
Persistence: Not guaranteed unless captured and saved elsewhere
Review or Quality Control: No
4 Channel Physical: Mediated; Cotemporality; Simultaneity; Sequentiality;
Reviewability; Hyperlinking
Expression: Multimedia
Conventions: MT; RT; @; subtweet; .@; via or h/t 21

22. Methods
22

23. Approach
• Pragmatic approach
• Multiple embedded case studies
23

24. Methods
• Participants:
Geoscientists who attend American Geophysical Union
conferences
• SCTs:
Blogs, Twitter, Twitter at Conferences
24

25. Why Geosciences
• Active Twitter and blog communities
• Professional society support for social media
• Funder support for social media
25

26. Methods
• Directed qualitative content analysis of a sample
tweets and blog content
• Semi-structured interviews with participants
• Participant observation
26

27. Sample Selection
and Content Retrieval
• Retrieved tweets using a variety of methods
• Random sample of 50 tweets from each meeting
plus additional to capture conversations
• Interview participants selected from meeting
tweeters and participant suggestions
• Seeking variation in demographics and research areas
• Seeking participants who also blog
27

28. Data Summary
• Tweets
• Retrieved 12,920
• Coded 1038
• Blog posts
• Retrieved 3,009
• Coded 426
• Interviews (8)
• Fully transcribed
• 291 minutes
28

29. Analysis
• Prepared memos with initial thoughts and
connections after each interview and as necessary
throughout analysis process
• Transcribed interview recordings with occasional
bracketed notes
• Loaded blog posts, tweets, and transcripts into
MaxQDA for management
29

30. Coding
• Coded once through using the framework, freely
adding new codes, annotating non-obvious new
codes and tricky applications of existing framework
elements
• Doubled back to check application of framework or
to recode using newly emergent codes
• Retrieved coded sections and analyzed to
determine if all examples of the same phenomenon
(axial coding)
30

31. Case Studies
• Prepared case studies for 7 individual scientists
• Initially in a narrative format
• Re-organized once categories became evident across
multiple studies
• Re-re-organized into tables once categories were stable
• Prepared cross-case analysis
• Addressed research questions
31

32. Validity
• Prolonged engagement
• Triangulation
• Memoing and questioning to mitigate personal
biases
32

33. Agenda
• Review of the Study
• Research Questions
• Revised Framework
• Methods
• Summary of Data
• How do SCTs support communication in science?
• How do participants make meaning of them?
• New ICTs and information seeking and use
• Contributions
• What Next?
33

34. How the new SCTs
support communication
in science
34

35. What functions do they serve?
Communication purposes
Blogs
More often used for:
• Persuasion
Twitter
More often used for:
• Amplification
• Humor
35
Twitter at Conferences
More often used for:
• Social identity

36. What functions do they serve?
Categories of content
Blogs
More often used for:
• Tutorials for peers
• Basic science concepts
• Book reviews
Twitter
More often used for:
• Pointing to readings
• Requesting assistance
• Announcing new papers
• Politics/religion
36
Twitter at Conferences
More often used for:
• Live coverage of sessions
(live blogging is not done)

37. What functions do they serve?
General
Blogs
• In depth, well-prepared
essays
• Provide context
• Preserve content
• Under the blogger’s
control
Twitter
• Faster interaction
• Broader interaction
• Non-scientists
• Scientists who use
similar tools in another
field
• Open and viewable
37

38. How do blogs and Twitter
fit into the context of scientific work?
Blogs
• Help guide exploration
process
• Assistance understanding
concept
• Amplification for
publications
• Advice and mentoring
Twitter
• Resource copies of
articles
• Filter for awareness of
new articles
• Maintaining ties
• Coordinate meetings
• Help with analysis,
software, other questions
38

39. How do the participants
make meaning of the
interactions?
39

40. Value to scientists
Blogs
• Practice writing with
feedback
• Social and professional
support
• Recognition and status
• Personal knowledge
management
Twitter
• Demonstrate public
communication skills
• Awareness of new
literature
• Quick feedback and
questions answered
40

41. View of SCTs: Participants
Blogs
• Routine, but often a
burden
• Familiar community
with regular
commenters
• A responsibility
Twitter
• Strong link to friends
available for a quick
comment or chat
• Source of fast breaking
news and updates
41

42. View of SCTs:
Peripheral Participants
Blogs
• See detailed posts as
great explanations of
the science and insight
into life as a scientist
Twitter
• A way to keep up
without excessive e-
mails or RSS
• A way to follow
conferences
42

43. View of SCTs: Non-participants
Blogs
• Most organizations are
indifferent, as long as
boundaries are
maintained
Twitter
• May think the entire
practice is odd!
43

44. New ICTs and
information seeking
and use
44

45. Information seeking and use:
Blogs
• Writing to explore, understand, and remember new
topics has been well-studied. Doing this in a public
forum adds beneficial community effects
• Keeping a blog helps the author retrieve the
information later for themselves or to refer others
• Informal communication of field site or lab
information may help other scientists fill in from
incomplete published reports
45

46. Information seeking and use:
Twitter
• Alerting and filtering system for new literature
• Seeking on Twitter has been unreliable at best
• Collecting and curating tweets in Storify or on a blog is a
work around
46

47. Limitations
• Geoscientists
• Only Twitter and Blogs
• Small number of scientists interviewed
47

48. Future Work
• Extend to other disciplines
• Extend to other SCTs
• Longitudinal look at Twitter at conferences
• Sense of community in blogs and Twitter
• Integrating personal, team, and public
communications
48

49. Conclusions
49

50. Blogs and Twitter Benefit Science
• Community building and maintenance
• Improved mentoring
• Increased public engagement
• Improved dissemination of traditional
communications
50

51. The framework
of communication in science
• A massive undertaking
• Future studies should examine and test small portions
• Useful in placing and understanding the
communication happening in these two SCTs
51

52. Contributions
The framework will be useful for:
• Situating new technologies
• Research on uses of SCTs
• Helping individuals and organizations understand SCTs,
so that they may support their use
• Helping to teach scientists how to communicate
• Teaching science librarians how to retrieve scientific
information
52

53. Implications for ICT Design and Use
• Make blog posting quicker
• Add function tags to blog posts – even better if
there are some common tags
• Conference organizers should provide better access
to tweets
• Tweet collection, retrieval, and curation should be
improved
• Librarians should use Twitter for improved access
to conference content
53

54. Contributions
• Increased appreciation of SCTs for informal
scholarly communication in science instead of just
for popular communication
• Increased appreciation for the value of these tools
for personal knowledge management.
54

55. Take Aways
• Both SCTs have valuable for information and
communication as well as for community building,
mentoring, and in support of learning and teaching.
• The framework provided a useful guide in
organizing the research and studying the SCTs
55

56. Contact:
Christina K. Pikas
cpikas@gmail.com
@cpikas
Slides will be posted to SlideShare
http://www.slideshare.net/cpikas
56