Adopción de redes sociales por revistas científicas de ciencias sociales

  1. Carlos Arcila-Calderón 1
  2. Mabel Calderín-Cruz 2
  3. Patricia Sánchez-Holgado 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Salamanca
    info

    Universidad de Salamanca

    Salamanca, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02f40zc51

  2. 2 Universidad Católica Andrés Bello
    info

    Universidad Católica Andrés Bello

    Caracas, Venezuela

    ROR https://ror.org/007fpb915

Revista:
El profesional de la información

ISSN: 1386-6710,  1699-2407

Año de publicación: 2019

Título del ejemplar: Número multidisciplinar de Información y Comunicación

Volumen: 28

Número: 1

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.3145/EPI.2019.ENE.05 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: El profesional de la información

Resumen

The expansion of social media forces the communication of science and scientific journals to adapt to this new environment. Previous studies and theoretical models such as UTAUT and UTAUT2 have proven that there is a relationship between the perception of future performance of technology (performance expectancy), the difficulty of use (effort expectancy) and the social influence to which the individual is subject, on the real use of technology, but there is still scarce research about the mechanisms that cause this effect. Starting with UTAUT, the hypothesis is that there is an indirect conditional effect of the performance expectancy, the effort expectancy and social influence, over the actual use of social media in scientific journals, where the effect is driven through the intention of use and the size of the effect is moderated by gender and age. A survey was carried out on 300 editors of the top 20 in Social Sciences of the Google Scholar ranking. Confirming partially UTAUT, the results of moderated mediation show that performance expectancy and social influence of editors affect the use of Facebook and Twitter, through the intention to use, but it is not the case of Researchgate, Academia and Linkedin. There is not enough evidence about the moderation of age and gender.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Acord, Sophia-Krzys; Harley, Diane (2013). “Credit, time, and personality: The human challenges to sharing scholarly work using Web 2.0”. New media & society, v. 15, n. 3, pp. 379-397. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812465140
  • Arcila-Calderón, Carlos; Calderín-Cruz, Mabel; Aguaded, Ignacio (2015). “Adoption of ICTs by communication researchers for scientific diffusion and data analysis”. El profesional de la información, v. 24, n. 5, p. 526-536. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.sep.03
  • Arcila-Calderón, Carlos; Piñuel-Raigada, José-Luis; Calderín-Cruz, Mabel (2013). “The e-research on media & communications: Attitudes, tools and practices in Latin America researchers”. Comunicar, v. 20, n. 40, pp. 111-118. https://doi.org/10.3916/C40-2013-03-01
  • Barjak, Franz; Lane, Julia; Poschen, Meik; Procter, Rob; Robinson, Simon; Wiegand, Gordon (2010). “E-infraestructure adoption in the social sciences and humanities”. Information, communication & society, v. 13, n. 5, pp. 635-651. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180903095849
  • Bellón-Rodríguez, Ana; Sixto-García, José (2011). “Aplicación y uso de la web 2.0 y de las redes sociales en la comunicación científica especializada: del marketing viral al usuario activo”. Anagramas. Rumbos y sentidos de la comunicación, v. 9, n. 18, pp. 61-70. https://doi.org/10.22395/angr.v9n18a4
  • Borgman, Christine L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. The MIT Press, ISBN: 978 0 262026192
  • Briceño, Ysabel (2014). “Saber y medios: hacia un modo emergente de la comunicación de la ciencia”. Bitácora-e. Revista electrónica latinoamericana de estudios sociales, históricos y culturales de la ciencia y la tecnología, v. 1. http://www.saber.ula.ve/handle/123456789/38746
  • Briceño, Ysabel; Arcila-Calderón, Carlos; Said-Hung, Elías (2012). “Colaboración y comunicación científica en la comunidad latinoamericana de físicos de altas energías”. E-colabora. Revista de ciencia, educación, innovación y cultura apoyadas por redes de tecnología avanzada, v. 2, n. 4, pp. 131-144.
  • Bruns, Axel; Liang, Yuxian-Eugene (2012). “Tools and methods for capturing Twitter data during natural disasters”. First Monday, v. 17, n. 4. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v17i4.3937
  • Campos-Freire, Francisco; Rúas-Araújo, José (2016). “Uso de las redes sociales digitales profesionales y científicas: el caso de las 3 universidades gallegas”. El profesional de la información, v. 25, n. 3, p. 431-440. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.may.13
  • Campos-Freire, Francisco; Valencia, Andrea (2015). “Managing academic profiles on scientific social networks”. En: Rocha, Álvaro; Correia, Ana-María; Costanzo, Sandra; Reis, Luis-Paulo (eds.). New contributions in information sytems and technologies, v. 353 , pp. 265-273. ISBN: 978 3 319 16485 4 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16486-1_27
  • Castillo-Esparcia, Antonio (2012). “Investigación e investigadores. Las revistas científicas como instrumento de comunicación”. Vivat Academia. Revista de comunicación, v. 14, n. 117, pp. 1002-1017. https://doi.org/10.15178/va.2011.117E.1002-1017
  • Cohen, Jacob (1992). “Statistical power analysis”. Current directions in psychological science, v. 1, n. 3, pp. 98-101. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783
  • Cronbach, Lee J. (1951). “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests”. Psychometrika, v. 16, n. 3, pp. 297-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
  • Cummings, Jonathon N.; Kiesler, Sara (2005). “Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries”. Social studies of science, v. 35, n. 5, pp. 703-722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705055535
  • Davis, Fred D. (1989). “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology”. MIS quarterly, v. 13, n. 3, p. 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  • Davis, Fred D.; Bagozzi, Richard P.; Warshaw, Paul R. (1992). “Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace”. Journal of applied social psychology, v. 22, n. 14, pp. 1111-1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
  • Direito-Rebollal, Sabela; Campos-Freire, Francisco (2016). “Altmetrics: A measure of scientific impact on social networks”. En: 11th Iberian conf on information systems and technologies (Cisti), pp. 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1109/CISTI.2016.7521616
  • Dutton, William H. (2010). “Reconfiguring access in research: information, expertise and experience”. En: Dutton, William H.; Jeffreys, Paul W. World wide research: reshaping the sciences and humanities, pp. 21-39. MIT Press Scholarship Online. ISBN: 978 0 262014397
  • Dutton, William H.; Meyer, Eric T. (2009). “Experience with new tools and infrastructures of research: An exploratory study of distance from, and attitudes toward, e-research”. Prometheus, v. 27, n. 3, pp. 223-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109020903127802
  • Faul, Franz; Erdfelder, Edgar; Buchner, Axel; Lang, Albert-Georg (2009). “Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses”. Behavior research methods, v. 41, n. 4, pp. 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
  • Faul, Franz; Erdfelder, Edgar; Lang, Albert-Georg; Buchner, Axel (2007). “G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences”. Behavior research methods, v. 39, n. 2, pp. 175-191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
  • García-Peñalvo, Francisco-José (2017). Marco para la ciencia abierta. Seminario. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1069582
  • Gentil-Beccot, Anne; Mele, Salvatore; Holtkamp, Annette; O’Connell, Heath B.; Brooks, Travis C. (2009). “Information resources in high-energy physics: Surveying the present landscape and charting the future course”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 60, n. 1, pp. 150-160. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20944
  • Gibbons, Michael; Limoges, Camille; Nowotny, Helga; Schwartzman, Simon; Scott, Peter; Trow, Martin (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. SAGE Publications. ISBN: 978 0 803977945
  • Hara, Noriko; Solomon, Paul; Kim, Seung-Lye; Sonnenwald, Diane H. (2003). “An emerging view of scientific collaboration: Scientists’ perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 54, n. 10, pp. 952-965. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10291
  • Hayes, Andrew F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York, NY: Guilford. ISBN: 978 1 609182304
  • Liao, Chien-Hsiang (2011). “How to improve research quality? Examining the impacts of collaboration intensity and member diversity in collaboration networks”. Scientometrics, v. 86, n. 3, pp. 747-761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0309-2
  • Meyer, Eric T.; Dutton, William H. (2009). “Top-down e-infrastructure meets bottom-up research innovation: The social shaping of e-research”. Prometheus, v. 27, n. 3, pp. 239-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109020903127810
  • Murthy, Dhiraj; Lewis, Jeremiah P. (2015). “Social media, collaboration, and scientific organizations”. American behavioral scientist, v. 59, n. 1, pp. 149-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214540504
  • Myers, Teresa A. (2011). “Goodbye, listwise deletion: Presenting hot deck imputation as an easy and effective tool for handling missing data”. Communication methods and measures, v. 5, n. 4, pp. 297-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2011.624490
  • Neylon, Cameron; Wu, Shirley (2008). “Open science: Tools, approaches and implications”. En: Biocomputing 2009, pp. 540-544. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812836939_0051
  • Oller-Alonso, Martín; Segarra-Saavedra, Jesús; Plaza-Nogueira, Alberto (2012). “La presencia de las revistas científicas de ciencias sociales en los social media: de la Web 1.0 a la 2.0”. Index.comunicación: Revista científica en el ámbito de la comunicación aplicada, v. 2, n. 1, pp. 49-68. http://journals.sfu.ca/indexcomunicacion/index.php/indexcomunicacion/article/view/27/367
  • Ponte, Diego; Simon, Judith (2011). “Scholarly communication 2.0: Exploring researchers’ opinions on web 2.0 for scientific knowledge creation, evaluation and dissemination”. Serials review, v. 37, n. 3, pp. 149-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2011.10765376
  • Procter, Rob; Voss, Alex; Asgari-Targhi, Marzieh (2013). “Fostering the human infrastructure of e-research”. Information, communication & society, v. 16, n. 10, pp. 1668-1691. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.715667
  • Procter, Rob; Williams, Robin; Stewart, James; Poschen, Meik; Snee, Helene; Voss, Alex; Asgari-Targhi, Marzieh (2010). “Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in scholarly communications”. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, v. 368, n. 1926, pp. 4039-56. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0155
  • Quinlan, Stephen; Gummer, Tobias; Roßmann, Joss; Wolf, Christof (2017). “‘Show me the money and the party!’ – variation in Facebook and Twitter adoption by politicians”. Information, communication & society, v. 21, n. 8, pp. 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1301521
  • Rigby, John; Edler, Jakob (2005). “Peering inside research networks: Some observations on the effect of the intensity of collaboration on the variability of research quality”. Research policy, v. 34, n. 6, pp. 784-794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.02.004
  • Rúas-Araújo, José; Campos-Freire, Francisco; Puentes-Rivera, Iván (2016). “Utilización y valoración de las redes sociales generalistas y buscadores bibliográficos en las universidades gallegas”. Revista latina de comunicación social, n. 71, pp. 1187-1207. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2016-1141
  • Santana-Arroyo, Sonia (2011). “Redes de intercambio de información científica y académica entre los profesionales, en el contexto de la Web 2.0”. Revista cubana de información en ciencias de la salud, v. 21, n. 3. http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S1024-94352010000300006&script=sci_abstract
  • Schiermeier, Quirin (2017). “Science publishers try new tack to combat unauthorized paper sharing”. Nature, v. 545, n. 7653, pp. 145-146. https://doi.org/10.1038/545145a
  • Stewart, James (2007). “Local experts in the domestication of information and communication technologies”. Information, communication & society, v. 10, n. 4, pp. 547-569. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180701560093
  • Taiwo, Ayankunle; Downe, Alan (2013). “The theory of user acceptance and use of technology (Utaut): A meta-analytic review of empirical findings”. Journal of theoretical and applied information technology, v. 49, n. 1, pp. 48-58. http://www.jatit.org/volumes/Vol49No1/7Vol49No1.pdf
  • Venkatesh, Viswanath; Morris, Michael G.; Davis, Gordon B.; Davis, Fred D. (2003). “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view”. MIS quarterly, v. 27, n. 3, pp. 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  • Venkatesh, Viswanath; Thong, James Y. L.; Xu, Xin (2012). “Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use technology”. MIS quarterly, v. 36, n. 1, pp. 157-172.
  • Voss, Alex; Asgari-Targhi, Marzieh; Procter, Rob; Fergusson, David (2010). “Adoption of e-infrastructure services: configurations of practice”. Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, v. 368, n. 1926, pp. 4161-4176. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0162
  • Waldrop, Mitchell (2008). “Science 2.0. Is open access science the future? Is posting raw results online, for all to see, a great tool or a great risk?”. Scientific American, v. 298, n. 5, pp. 68-73.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet