Research Gate or Revolving Door? Uses and Gratifications of Academic Social Media Among Communication Scholars

Abstract

A survey of scholars in mass communication and related disciplines found that the academic social network ResearchGate is a popular platform for following like-minded academics, sharing one’s work, locating relevant research, and managing one’s academic reputation, in addition to gratifying more traditional social media needs, such as information seeking, social interaction, and even entertainment. The analysis revealed that academics who are extrinsically motivated to conduct research update their accounts more frequently but extract fewer benefits from the platform. Moreover, respondents agree that the RG Score generated by the social platform is not an accurate metric for one’s research impact.

Keywords

ResearchGate academic social networking intrinsic and extrinsic motivations uses and gratifications communication education tenure and promotion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brunell

A. B.

Webster

G. D.

(2013). Self-determination and sexual experience in dating relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(7), 970–987.

Chakraborty

(2012, March 1–3). Activities and reasons for using social networking sites by research scholars in NEHU: A study on Facebook and ResearchGate [Conference session]. Inflibnet PLANNER, Sikkim University, Gangtok, India.

Curtin

P. A.

Russial

Tefertiller

(2018). Reviewer’s perceptions of the peer review process in journalism and mass communication. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 278–299.

Deci

E. L.

Kasser

Ryan

R. M.

(1997). Self-determined teaching: Opportunities and obstacles. In Bess

J. L.

(Ed.), Teaching well and liking it: Motivating faculty to teach effectively (pp. 57–71). The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Education Psychology, 25, 54–67.

Hitchcock

(2014, July 28). Twitter and blogs are not just add-ons to academic research, but a simple reflection of the passion underpinning it. The LSE Impact Blog, London School of Economics and Political Science. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/07/28/twitter-and-blogs-academic-public-sphere/

Katz

Blumler

Gurevitch

(1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In Blumler

Katz

(Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). SAGE.

LaPoe

V. L.

Carter Olson

Eckert

(2017). “Linkedin Is My Office; Facebook My Living Room, Twitter the Neighborhood Bar”: Media Scholars’ liminal use of social media for peer and public communication. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 41(3), 185–206.

Lechuga

V. M.

Lechuga

D. C.

(2012). Faculty motivation and scholarly work: Self-determination and self-regulation perspectives. Journal of the Professoriate, 6(2), 59–97.

10.

Linek

Teka Hadgu

Hoffmann

C. P.

Jäschke

Puschmann

(2017). It’s all about information? The following behaviour of professors and PhD students on Twitter. The Journal of Web Science, 3(1), 1–15.

11.

Madison

Hopp

Santana

A. D.

Stansberry

(2018). A motivational perspective on mass communication students’ satisfaction with their major: Investigating antecedents and consequences. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 73(1), 50–66.

12.

Martín-Martín

Orduña-Malea

Ayllón

J. M.

López-Cózar

E. D.

(2016). The counting house: Measuring those who count. Presence of bibliometrics, scientometrics, informetrics, webometrics and altmetrics in the google scholar citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley & Twitter (EC3 Working Papers, 21). https://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.02412.pdf

13.

McGrail

M. R.

Rickard

C. M.

Jones

(2006). Publish or perish: A systematic review of interventions to increase academic publication rates. Higher Education Research & Development, 25(1), 19–35.

14.

Mewburn

Thomson

(2013). Why do academics blog? An analysis of audiences, purposes and challenges. Studies in Higher Education, 38(8), 1105–1119.

15.

Orduna-Malea

Martín-Martín

Thelwall

López-Cózar

E. D.

(2017). Do ResearchGate Scores create ghost academic reputations? Scientometrics, 112(1), 443–460.

16.

Palmgreen

Rayburn

J. D.

(1985). A comparison of gratification models of media satisfaction. Communications Monographs, 52(4), 334–346.

17.

Priem

Hemminger

B. H.

(2010). Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social web. First Monday, 15(7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874

18.

Quan-Haase

Martin

McCay-Peet

(2015). Networks of digital humanities scholars: The informational and social uses and gratifications of Twitter. Big Data & Society, 2(1), 1–12.

19.

ResearchGate. (2020). About us. https://www.researchgate.net/about

20.

Sørebø

Ø.

Halvari

Gulli

V. F.

Kristiansen

(2009). The role of self-determination theory in explaining teachers’ motivation to continue to use e-learning technology. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1177–1187.

21.

Segado-Boj

Díaz-Campo

Fernández-Gómez

Chaparro-Domínguez

M. Á

. (2019). Spanish academics and social networking sites: Use, non-use, and the perceived advantages and drawbacks of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, ResearchGate, and Academia.edu. First Monday, 24(5).

22.

Shao

(2009). Understanding the appeal of user-generated media: A uses and gratification perspective. Internet Research, 19(1), 7–25.

23.

Stevens

(1986). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In Stevens

(Eds.), Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (pp. 385–470). Routledge.

24.

Stupnisky

R. H.

BrckaLorenz

Yuhas

Guay

(2018). Faculty members’ motivation for teaching and best practices: Testing a model based on self-determination theory across institution types. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 53, 15–26.

25.

Stupnisky

R. H.

Hall

N. C.

Daniels

L. M.

Mensah

(2017). Testing a model of pretenure faculty members’ teaching and research success: Motivation as a mediator of balance, expectations, and collegiality. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(3), 376–400.

26.

Thelwall

Kousha

(2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring Scholarship? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(5), 876–889.

27.

Vallerand

R. J.

Blais

M. R.

Brière

N. M.

Pelletier

L. G.

(1989). Construction et validation de l'échelle de motivation en éducation (EME) [Construction and validation of the motivation scale in education (MSE)]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 21(3), 323–349.

28.

Vansteenkiste

Williams

G. C.

Resnicow

(2012). Toward systematic integration between self-determination theory and motivational interviewing as examples of top-down and bottom-up intervention development: Autonomy or volition as a fundamental theoretical principle. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9(1), Article 23.

29.

Veletsianos

Kimmons

(2016). Scholars in an increasingly open and digital world: How do education professors and students use Twitter? The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 1–10.

30.

Velicer

W. F.

Jackson

D. N.

(1990). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: Some issues in selecting an appropriate procedure. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(1), 1–28.

31.

Zaharie

M. A.

Osoian

C. L.

(2016). Peer review motivation frames: A qualitative approach. European Management Journal, 34(1), 69–79.