The role of new Information and Communication Technologiesin information and communication in science

A conceptual framework and empirical study

Dissertation Defense

Christina K. PikasJanuary 19, 2016

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

Given• “Communication is the essence of science” (Garvey, 1979)• 20 – 25% of scientists use blogs and/or Twitter

YearMedia Sample Result Reference

2008Blogs Authors, editors, reviewers of

scholarly journals3% have a blog13% read blogs regularly

(Mark Ware Consulting, 2008)

2010 Blogs British researchers 16% blog occasionally or frequently23% 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 regularly17% Earth and Environmental Science Researchers visit Twitter regularly

(Van Noorden, 2014)

2015 Blogs American scientists 24% have blogged about science19% 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?

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

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

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

8

Approach

Develop a comprehensive framework to describe communication in sciencethat 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.

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

10

Framework

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

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

13

Elements of the Framework

• Partners• Purposes• Content• Channel

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

15

Channel: Physical LayerThree categories

• Face-to-face• Print• Technologically mediated

Each with some of these features

• Copresence• Visibility• Audibility• Cotemporality• Simultaneity• Sequentiality• Reviewability• Revisability• Coherence• Hyperlinking

16

Channel: Means of Expression Non-Linguistic Linguistic

Auditory SoundsInstrumental music

Spoken word

Visual Images/picturesModels

Text

Tactile Models Braille

Other Senses (smell, taste, proprioception)

Typically only applicable in (virtual) reality settings.

Audiovisual, Multimedia, Hypermedia

Combining multiple means of expression.

17

Channel: Conventions

• Conventions and etiquette

Examples: Twitter’s @user, RT, and #hashtags were developed by users before they were programmed into the interface

18

Literature Based Application

19

Journal Articles1 Partners Number: Many

Match: SameEducation/Sophistication: Same; General Science

2 Purpose Dissemination (All); Certification; Preservation; Discourse; Identity; Rewards; Learning/Teaching; Persuasion

3 Message Topic: Science content; Research Methods; PedagogyType: Data; Methods; Analysis; Results; Theoretical /philosophicalRegister: FormalStructure: Stable established internal structure Persistence: Archival Review or Quality Control: Yes – rigor varies

4 Channel Physical: Print or Mediated Sequentiality; Reviewability; Coherence; HyperlinkingExpression: linguistic and non-linguistic; visual;Conventions: Attribution/citation; Omission of false starts and missteps; Passive voice…

20

Blogs1 Partners Number: Many

Education/Sophistication: Same; General Science; Interested PublicMatch: 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/PhilosophicalRegister: AnyStructure: 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; HyperlinkingExpression: MultimediaConvention: Linking to attribute sources

21

Microblogs1 Partners Number: Many

Education/Sophistication: Same; General Science; Interested Public; General PublicMatch: 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 AnswersRegister: Typically informal, but not alwaysStructure: Fields but no internal structure Persistence: Not guaranteed unless captured and saved elsewhereReview or Quality Control: No

4 Channel Physical: Mediated; Cotemporality; Simultaneity; Sequentiality; Reviewability; HyperlinkingExpression: MultimediaConventions: MT; RT; @; subtweet; .@; via or h/t

22

Methods

23

Approach

• Pragmatic approach

• Multiple embedded case studies

24

Methods

• Participants: Geoscientists who attend American Geophysical Union conferences

• SCTs: Blogs, Twitter, Twitter at Conferences

25

Why Geosciences

• Active Twitter and blog communities

• Professional society support for social media

• Funder support for social media

26

Methods

• Directed qualitative content analysis of a sample tweets and blog content

• Semi-structured interviews with participants

• Participant observation

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

28

Data Summary

• Tweets• Retrieved 12,920• Coded 1038

• Blog posts• Retrieved 3,009• Coded 426

• Interviews (8)• Fully transcribed• 291 minutes

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

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)

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

32

Validity

• Prolonged engagement

• Triangulation

• Memoing and questioning to mitigate personal biases

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

How the new SCTs support communication in science

34

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/religionTwitter 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

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?

40

Value to scientistsBlogs• 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

41

View of SCTs: ParticipantsBlogs• 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

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

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!

44

New ICTs and information seeking and use

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

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

47

Limitations

• Geoscientists

• Only Twitter and Blogs

• Small number of scientists interviewed

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

49

Conclusions

50

Blogs and Twitter Benefit Science

• Community building and maintenance

• Improved mentoring

• Increased public engagement

• Improved dissemination of traditional communications

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

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

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

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.

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

56

Contact: Christina K. Pikascpikas@gmail.com@cpikasSlides will be posted to SlideSharehttp://www.slideshare.net/cpikas