Jordan, K. (2013) Academics and their online networks: Exploring the role of academic social networking sites. Presentation at the Association for Learning Technology Conference (ALT-C), 11th September 2013, University of Nottingham, UK.

1. 11/09/2013
Katy Jordan
The Open University
Katy.jordan@open.ac.uk
@katy_jordan
Association for Learning
Technology Conference
11th September 2013
Academics and their online networks
Exploring the role of academic social
networking sites

2. Defining academic SNS
“We define social network
sites as web-based services
that allow individuals to (1)
construct a public or semi-
public profile within a
bounded system, (2)
articulate a list of other
users with whom they share
a connection, and (3) view
and traverse their list of
connections and those
made by others within the
system.” (boyd &
Ellison, 2007).
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
Numberofusers
Web rank
Academia.edu
ResearchGate.net
Mendeley.com
Lallslo.com
Mynetresearch.com
Iamresearcher.com
Academici.com

3. Affordances of academic SNS
• Identity: Constructing an online academic profile
– Almousa, 2011; Menendez, de Angeli &
Menestrina, 2012
• Communication: Discovery and dissemination of
research findings; asking and answering questions.
– Veletsianos, 2011
• Collaboration: Finding similar or different
collaborators; supporting active research
relationships.
– Jeng et al., 2012; Oh & Jeng, 2011

4. Research questions
• What is the structure of academic social
networks?
• To what extent do different academic social
networking sites foster similar networks?
• Do factors such as discipline or position correlate
with behaviour in the network?

5. Research methods
• Focused upon Open University (OU) academics
• Mapped network of connections between OU-
affiliated academics on three main academic SNS
• Categorised according to position and discipline
• Survey carried out on a sub-sample to explore
perceptions about role of academic SNS and
follow up on differences in network structure
based on position and discipline

6. Visualizing the networks - discipline
Mendeley Academia.edu

7. Community structure
Historical & Philosophical Studies
Education
Biological Sciences
Social Studies
Computer Science
Business & Administration
Creative Arts & Design
Medicine related
Physical Sciences
Mathematics
Languages
Law
Linguistics, Classics & related
Engineering

8. Connection and position in the
network
• Both degree and centrality showed significant
differences according to position
• More senior academics have a higher degree
and occupy a more central position in the network
0
10
20
30
40
Degree
Position
 = In degree
☐ = out degree

9. Survey results
Theme Item Subject Position Active
Communication
– posing and
answering
questions
Being able to ask questions of the online community is important
Academic SNS allow me to draw upon a wider community of expertise
when I need help
Communication
– academic
publications
Academic SNS are a good way of promoting my own academic publications
Academic SNS are a good way of finding out about new publications of
interest
Collaboration –
present and
future
Academic SNS are a useful way to support working in collaboration with
other researchers
Having a profile will enhance my future career prospects
Identity – how
academics view
the role of
profiles
Being part of an academic SNS is useful
My online academic and personal identities are separated
I see my profile as an online business card
I use my profile as a research journal
I actively interact with others via the site
Identity –
exploring
trends in
network
structure
I only follow people who I know personally
If someone follows me, I follow them back
I follow people who I would like to work with in the future
I follow people as a way of staying in touch with people I used to work with

10. Conclusions
• Provided an insight into the network structure
fostered by academic SNS
• Similarities with social network structures in other
contexts
• Subject area influential on community structure
• Seniority influential on position and connectivity
of individual nodes

11. Acknowledgements
• Thanks to my supervisors, Professor Martin Weller
and Dr. Canan Blake.
• This work was made possible through a doctoral
studentship from the Centre for Research in
Education and Educational Technology at the Open
University, UK.
• Special thanks to all of the Open University
graduate students and academics who took part in
the pilot study.

12. References
• Almousa, O. (2011) Users’ classification and usage-pattern identification in academic
social networks. Proc. AEECT.
• boyd, d.m. & Ellison, N.B. (2007) Social network sites: Definition, history and scholarship.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 1, article 1.
• Jeng, W., He, D., Jiang, J. & Zhang, Y. (2012) Groups in Mendeley: Owners’ descriptions
and group outcomes. Proc. ASIST.
• Menendez, M., de Angeli, A. & Menestrina, Z. (2012) Chapter 4: Exploring the virtual
space of academia. In: J. Dugdale et al. (eds.) From research to practice in the design of
cooperative systems. Springer.
• Nentwich, M. & Konig, R.(2012) Cyberscience 2.0: Research in the age of digital social
networks. Campus Verlag.
• Oh, J.S. & Jeng, W. (2011) Groups in academic social networking services: An exploration
of their potential as a platform for multi-disciplinary collaboration. Proc. SocialCom.
• Rainie, L. & Wellman, B. (2012) Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge:
MIT Press.
• Veletsianos, G. (2011), Higher education scholars' participation and practices on Twitter.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 28(4), 336-349.
• Weller, M. (2011) The Digital Scholar: How technology is transforming scholarly practice.
London: Bloomsbury.