Use of Social Networking Sites among Chinese and American Researchers: A Comparative Study

Xu, Jie; Yang, Tao; Cong, Ting; Zeng, Yuanxiang

doi:10.3138/jsp.47.1.03

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additional studies that also targeted specifically the scholarly population focused each on a particular segment and specific aspect of their professional communication behaviour, inevitably rendering our appreciation of the developments in this area patchy. Thus, for example, Xu, Yang, Cong, and Zeng's (2015) study compared Chinese and American researchers' attitude to and usage of social media to find that cultural orientations leave their mark on scholarly views and behaviours. Still, as the study focused on general SNS, such as Facebook and Twitter, rather than specifically scholarly‐oriented ones, such as ResearchGate or Academia.edu, its results cannot fully represent the range of scholarly communication that takes place on the social web.…”

Section: Background and Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

National comparisons of early career researchers' scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper compares the scholarly communication attitudes and practices of early career researchers (ECRs) in eight countries concerning discovery, reading, publishing, authorship, open access, and social media. The data are taken from the most recent investigation in the 4-year-long Harbingers project. A survey was undertaken to establish whether the scholarly communication behaviours of the new wave of researchers are uniform, progressing, or changing in the same overall direction or whether they are impacted significantly by national and cultural differences. A multilingual questionnaire hosted on SurveyMonkey was distributed in 2019 via social media networks of researchers, academic publishers, and key ECR platforms in the UK,

show abstract

Section: Background and Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

National comparisons of early career researchers' scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There was not: if anything, Chinese reviewers were less positive. Xu and colleagues () undertook a study comparing the use of social networking sites on scholarly communication. The bottom line is that most Chinese researchers tend not to use social networking sites for academic purposes – considerably less than their American counterparts.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chinese researchers, scholarly communication behaviour and trust

Nicholas

et al. 2016

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over 660 Chinese researchers were questioned about their scholarly use, citing, and publishing and how trust is exercised in these key activities. Research showed few signs of new forms of scholarly usage behaviour taking hold, despite multiple opportunities afforded by Science 2.0 developments. Thus, for determining trustworthiness for usage purposes, the most important activity was reading the abstract. In terms of citations, citing the seminal source was the most common activity. In contrast, citing non‐peer reviewed sources, such as the social media, was not thought acceptable. For publishing, relevance to the field was the most important factor when choosing a place to publish. Comparisons were made with a study of 3650 international researchers, which employed the same methods and questions. The main differences between Chinese and international researchers were that the former (a) rated abstracts more highly, (b) took into account impact factors more when citing and publishing and (c) were much more likely to be influenced by institutional directives when placing their articles.

show abstract

“…Although listed by different names and with different prevalence periods, most authors divide the field of sociology of professions into three phases or three basic theoretical approachesthe functionalist, interactionist and the conflict one [1,2,6,11,14]. Each of these phases can be linked to a then prominent key research concept from which a paradigm shift in the sociology of professions over the years can be clearly seen.…”

Section: Main Research Streams In the Field Of The Sociology Of Professionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The, previously briefly described, functionalist approach in the sociological research of professions, dominant in the period from the 1930s to the 1970s, is also called the trait or taxonomic approach, as it seeks to determine the attributes and characteristics that distinguish professions from other occupations, thus classifying occupations according to the attributes they do or do not possess [2]. This approach, as some authors [3,4,6,13] also call Anglo-American approach, is based on Durkheim's perception of the profession, and its origin, as the one of the discipline of sociology of professions itself, can be found in the work of Alexander Carr-Saunders and Paul Wilson from 1933, who sought to identify the similarities of 30 occupations with a similar organization and scientifically based knowledge [1,11,14].…”

Section: The Good: Functionalism and "Profession" (1930-1970)mentioning

confidence: 99%

"The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" of Professions: Overview of the Theoretical Developments in the Sociology of Professions

Čavar¹

2021

Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article offers a brief overview of the history of research in the field of the sociology of professions. It presents the development of sociological theoretical approaches in the study of professions, its main research areas, basic concepts over time, and changes in the definition of profession itself over time. Beginning with a short outline of the classical theories in which sociological studying of professions finds its origins, the article proceeds with a more detailed presentation of the three main approaches and development stages of sociology of professionsthe functionalist, the interactionalist and the social conflict. Apart from presenting the main research focuses of these approaches, this article also explores different concepts and views of profession, beginning with the "profession" in functionalism, moving on to the "professionalization" in interactionism and ending with the "professionalism" in the social conflict phase. Following this transformation, the article also describes the shift from profession's initially socially constructive to rather obstructive image over the years and across the approaches. Finally, it reflects on the thesis of the "death" of the discipline and research field of the sociology of professions and reviews contemporary approaches to the subject that are either turning mainly into micro studies of specific professions or falling out of the field of sociology and becoming the research focus of disciplines seeking to maintain or establish the status of being a profession themselves.

show abstract

Use of Social Networking Sites among Chinese and American Researchers: A Comparative Study

Cited by 10 publications

References 23 publications

National comparisons of early career researchers' scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours

National comparisons of early career researchers' scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours

Chinese researchers, scholarly communication behaviour and trust

"The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" of Professions: Overview of the Theoretical Developments in the Sociology of Professions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About