Language:

Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication

Scientometrics, 2014-11, Vol.101 (2), p.1027-1042 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2014 ;2015 INIST-CNRS ;ISSN: 0138-9130 ;EISSN: 1588-2861 ;DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3 ;CODEN: SCNTDX

Full text available

Citations Cited by

Actions
1. Add to My Research
2. Remove from My Research
3. E-mail
4. Print
5. Permalink
6. Citation
7. EasyBib
8. EndNote
9. RefWorks
10. Delicious
11. Export RIS
12. Export BibTeX

Title:
Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication
Author: Holmberg, Kim ; Thelwall, Mike
Subjects: Bibliometrics. Scientometrics ; Bibliometrics. Scientometrics. Evaluation ; Blogs ; Computer Science ; Exact sciences and technology ; Information and communication sciences ; Information science. Documentation ; Information Storage and Retrieval ; Informetrics ; Library and information science. General aspects ; Library Science ; Scholarly communication ; Sciences and techniques of general use ; Social networks ; Subject fields ; User behaviour
Is Part Of: Scientometrics, 2014-11, Vol.101 (2), p.1027-1042
Description: This paper investigates disciplinary differences in how researchers use the microblogging site Twitter. Tweets from selected researchers in ten disciplines (astrophysics, biochemistry, digital humanities, economics, history of science, cheminformatics, cognitive science, drug discovery, social network analysis, and sociology) were collected and analyzed both statistically and qualitatively. The researchers tended to share more links and retweet more than the average Twitter users in earlier research and there were clear disciplinary differences in how they used Twitter. Biochemists retweeted substantially more than researchers in the other disciplines. Researchers in digital humanities and cognitive science used Twitter more for conversations, while researchers in economics shared the most links. Finally, whilst researchers in biochemistry, astrophysics, cheminformatics and digital humanities seemed to use Twitter for scholarly communication, scientific use of Twitter in economics, sociology and history of science appeared to be marginal.
Publisher: Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands
Language: English
Identifier: ISSN: 0138-9130
EISSN: 1588-2861
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3
CODEN: SCNTDX
Source: Alma/SFX Local Collection

Back to results list


INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY	(84-028) 37 755 057	Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM	thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn	Feedback

Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication

Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2014 ;2015 INIST-CNRS ;ISSN: 0138-9130 ;EISSN: 1588-2861 ;DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3 ;CODEN: SCNTDX

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait