Alex Ball
Fri, 07 May 2010 03:32:28 -0700
Apologies for cross-postingA big thank you to everyone who replied to my earlier e-mail about social media usage. I had five e-mails, while ten people filled out the version on SurveyMonkey. Of these fifteen replies, two were null responses (i.e. "I don't use any.").
The spread of roles played by respondents was as in the list below. * Data Manager/Curator: 3 * Data Centre/Archive/Repository: 3 * IT Services: 1 * Library Service: 5 * Researcher: 4 * Social Media Officer: 1 Blogging and microbloggingSix of the respondents used both blogging and microblogging tools, while three blogged but did not microblog, three microblogged but did not blog, and one did neither. Unsurprisingly, all the microbloggers used Twitter, though two also used Facebook and one also used Identi.ca. A variety of blogging platforms were in use, the most popular being WordPress (four plus one aspiration) and Blogger (three). A few respondents mentioned services they used for tracking blogging activity, such as FriendFeed and Technorati.
There was some variety in the reasons people cited for reading and writing blogs and microblogs. The most common reason was as a way of connecting with peers, closely followed by keeping up to date with new resources and initiatives, and monitoring current issues. Two respondents valued the ability to get quick answers to questions. Others saw blogs and microblogs as a good way of getting a feel for unfamiliar problem spaces, as a useful event management tool, as a tool for collecting relevant information for others to consume and repurpose in various ways, as an efficient dissemination tool, and as a source of unofficial information and candid opinions.
Discussion and networkingThere was no sense of gravitation towards a single platform for discussion and networking among the respondents. The platforms mentioned more than once were mailing lists, FriendFeed and Facebook. Others included LinkedIn, Academia.edu and Ning. Several respondents quoted more private methods of communication and collaboration, such as content management systems, wikis, voice-over-IP systems, instant messaging and Google Wave. Points of contact with the other categories in the survey were also apparent, with mentions of Twitter, Delicious and Yahoo Buzz.
Again, the reasons for using these platforms include getting expert answers and opinions, engaging with peers, linking ideas, and monitoring the activity within a field. DCC mailing lists and FriendFeed came particularly recommended, and while one respondent was impressed with Ning they were less impressed with its charging plans.
Social bookmarkingThe most popular platform for sharing links to Web resources was Delicious (with one respondent cautiously recommending the 'data_curation_resources' tag), closely followed by Twitter and Facebook. More personal media such as e-mail and instant messaging were also used. One respondent has set up a cascade so that links can be sent from Google Reader to Delicious and posted automatically on blogs, Facebook and Twitter.
The aspects of social bookmarking most valued by respondents were ease (and speed) of use, trustworthy recommendations, cloud-based storage of bookmarks, and having a venue for discussing interesting resources. There were mixed feelings about how Delicious organises links: while the tags are useful, some felt they do not provide enough structure.
Sharing literatureFor the most part, the respondents did not cite specialist tools for sharing references to papers and reports. The most popular platform, used by six of the respondents, was Twitter. Two used Delicious, two used project wikis, while others used FriendFeed, instant messaging and the first-generation Web solution of tracking the Web pages of individual academics. The most popular specialist tool, used by three respondents, was Mendeley, although one respondent did not associate it with this category of tools; the other specialist platform was Academia.edu.
The question of the benefits of sharing references, or of particular platforms, only attracted three responses. One respondent again valued having a source of high quality literature recommendations, while another valued the timeliness of such recommendations, and the sense of community they foster. The third response praised the control of permissions and formatting available in Confluence wiki software, but admitted that maintaining public-facing wiki pages can be a daunting task.
General pointsI did not enquire about sharing videos or presentation slideshows, for brevity rather than lack of interest. It was good to hear from one respondent that they appreciate scholarly content on YouTube, SlideShare and Prezi (alongside some other, less social sources).
One of the aspects of social media in general that respondents valued was the ability to manipulate the information in various ways, particularly where that information is made available through a newsfeed. One respondent uses Yahoo Pipes to aggregate feeds of news and resources into a single stream for perusal in Google Reader. Another filters a set of feeds for items of particular interest in FeedDemon.
One respondent summed up their usage of social media as follows."Overall, I'm using tools for three purposes: to ask questions\slash get help from the community; stay aware of what's going on; and to inform my local community and others about what I and my institution are working on and thinking about."
Once again, thanks to everyone who took part in the survey. Cheers, Alex. -- Alex Ball Research Officer UKOLN, University of Bath, UK. BA2 7AY T: +44 1225 383668 F: +44 1225 386256 http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
<<attachment: a_ball.vcf>>