Social Network Sites for Scientists [electronic resource] : A Quantitative Survey
Ortega, Jose Luis.
Kent : Elsevier Science,
2016.
 Social Network Sites for Scientists: A Quantitative Survey explores the newest social network sites (for example, ResearchGate and Academia.edu) and web bibliographic platforms (Mendeley, Zotero) that have recently emerged for the scholarly community to use in the interchange of information and documents. Chapters describe their main characteristics, what their advantages and limitations are, and the researchers that populate these websites. The surveys included in the book have been conducted following a quantitative approach, and measure the strength of the services provided by the sites in terms of use and activity. In addition, they also discuss the implications of new products in the future of scientific communication and their impact on research activities and evaluation. Analyzes social network sites form scientists using a quantitative approach Introduces the quantitative study of the main characteristic and functionalities of each platform, and the activity that they develop Offers a scientific review of the most relevant and current studies on this issue, discussing their results and commenting on their implications for scientific communication and research evaluation
Description based upon print version of record.
Front Cover; Social Network Sites for Scientists; Copyright Page; Contents; List of Figures; List of Tables; Preface; About the Author; 1 Introduction; 1.1 The Web and the Web 2.0 Concept; 1.2 Social Networking Sites - The Web of the People; 1.3 Open Access - Toward a New Scientific Communication; 1.4 Almetrics - The Social Impact of Science; 1.5 Social Network Sites for Scientists; 1.5.1 Definition; 1.5.2 Functions; 1.5.3 Motivations and Adoption; 1.5.4 Typology; 1.5.5 Business Models; 1.6 Methods; 1.6.1 Scope; 1.6.2 Indicators; 1.6.2.1 Activity; 1.6.2.2 Compound Annual Growth Rate
1.6.2.3 Country Penetration1.6.2.4 Country Spreading; 1.6.2.5 Recent Activity; 1.6.3 Sources; 1.6.4 Data Extraction; Note; References; 2 The First Attempts; 2.1 Nature Network; 2.1.1 A Wide Range of Contacting Tools; 2.1.1.1 Forums; 2.1.1.2 Groups; 2.1.1.3 Hubs; 2.1.1.4 Blogs; 2.1.1.5 Questions & Answers; 2.1.1.6 Workbench; 2.1.2 The Natural Community; 2.1.3 The Chatting Room; 2.2 BiomedExperts; 2.2.1 Scientist's Directory; 2.2.2 Interaction Tools; 2.2.3 Structure; 2.2.4 Pre-elaborated Profiles; 2.2.5 UniPHY: The Physics Sequel; 2.2.6 A Static Network of Automatic Profiles
2.3 Why did these Sites Fail?References; 3 Social Bookmarking Sites; 3.1 CiteULike; 3.1.1 A Decayed Database; 3.1.2 Building a Social Library; 3.1.2.1 Tags; 3.1.2.2 Groups; 3.1.3 A Community in Decline; 3.1.4 Research Fields; 3.1.5 The Decay of an Extended Service; 3.2 BibSonomy; 3.2.1 Coverage, a user Called DBLP; 3.2.2 The German Club; 3.2.3 Social Dimension; 3.2.3.1 The BibSonomy's Meeting Point; 3.2.3.2 Tabs, Linking Documents; 3.2.4 A Local Project; 3.3 The Social Benefit of Egoism; Note; References; 4 Reference Management Tools; 4.1 Mendeley; 4.1.1 Desktop App
4.1.2 The Crowdsourced Catalogue4.1.3 The Social Network; 4.1.3.1 Tags or Keywords?; 4.1.3.2 Profiles, the Students' Network; 4.1.3.3 Groups, the Readers' Club; 4.1.4 Discovering Recommended Papers; 4.2 Zotero; 4.2.1 References in the Cloud; 4.2.1.1 Profiles, Just a Calling Card; 4.2.1.2 Groups, the Only Way of Sharing; 4.2.2 Open Source, Close Content; 4.3 Could a Reference Manager be a Social Site?; References; 5 Document Sharing Services; 5.1 ResearchGate; 5.1.1 Metrics, Tracking the User Actions; 5.1.1.1 RG Score; 5.1.1.2 Impact Points; 5.1.1.3 Citations; 5.1.1.4 Publications
5.1.1.5 Views5.1.1.6 Downloads; 5.1.1.7 Followers/followings; 5.1.2 Organizations, Beyond the Personal Profiles; 5.1.3 Publications, Self-archiving Driving Force; 5.1.4 Profiles, a Balanced Scientific Community; 5.1.5 Questions & Answers, a Forum Concealed by Questions; 5.1.6 More than a Social Network; 5.2 Academia.edu; 5.2.1 Profiles, the Humanists Network; 5.2.2 Papers, an Unstructured Ragbag; 5.2.3 Research Interests, Tagging the Content; 5.2.4 Viewers or Producers Network?; 5.3 Towards the Complete Academic Networking Site; References; 6 Comparison; 6.1 Size, Searching the Critical Mass
6.1.1 Profiles, the Main Asset of a Network
Includes bibliographical references and index.
 Social Network Sites for Scientists: A Quantitative Survey explores the newest social network sites (for example, ResearchGate and Academia.edu) and web bibliographic platforms (Mendeley, Zotero) that have recently emerged for the scholarly community to use in the interchange of information and documents. Chapters describe their main characteristics, what their advantages and limitations are, and the researchers that populate these websites. The surveys included in the book have been conducted following a quantitative approach, and measure the strength of the services provided by the sites in terms of use and activity. In addition, they also discuss the implications of new products in the future of scientific communication and their impact on research activities and evaluation. Analyzes social network sites form scientists using a quantitative approach Introduces the quantitative study of the main characteristic and functionalities of each platform, and the activity that they develop Offers a scientific review of the most relevant and current studies on this issue, discussing their results and commenting on their implications for scientific communication and research evaluation
Science
Online social networks.