Fei Shu (speaker) & Stefanie Haustein - On the Citation Advantage of Tweeted Papers at the Journal Level
Previous research - twitter exposure leads to an overall increase of citations. Correlation is weak. Low social media impact in countries where Twitter, for example, is limited or blocked.
Research questions - compare normalized citation rate of articles shared on twitter with similar papers from the same year. 22% of WoS papers are tweeted? (talking fast!) This causes problems - so look at journal level, control for journal, discipline, country of origin author. Data Web of Science and Altmetric.com . Use the DOI to search both. In Altmetric can see where the tweets originate. They used thresholds to deal with outliers. Used tweets and citations from 2012 to 2015. Since there were some papers with very few tweeted papers, these would be difficult to compare. Used journals with at least 10 tweeted and 10 non-tweeted papers. ... also did threshold with 100 and 100 - in this case of 308 journals, 36% papers tweeted. Tweeted papers receive 68.4% more citations on average than non-tweeted (not corrected). Corrected by journal 30% citation advantage (significant at p<0.05). By discipline - varies - significant in 9 disciplines - not significant in chem, engr, human, math due to sample size. Source countries (based on author institution) - threshold level. Country with top tweeted - Netherlands. Sweden 91% citation advantage.
Citation advantage 30%, in all disciplines but extent varies.
Most tweets are from 6 months after publication
Chris Hubbles (speaker), David W. McDonald, & Jin Ha Lee - F#%@ That Noise: SoundCloud As (A-)Social Media?
SoundCloud is used to share and communicate about music. Has timestamped commenting and allows social interaction among fans woven into the playback feature. Used to distribute music, podcasts, and even some government organizations. "Social Multimedia" . Qualitative content analysis on these comments. Used search API (ID popular tracks) and then track API to pull all the comments for these tracks. Whole year of 2013. 100-200 tracks per day uploaded except for a weird spike. They removed from the sample spoken word. Kept 0-10 miutes, 10-500 comments. Collaboratively coded by authors. Codebook with 39 codes. 58 songs, 5,608 comments. 69% electronic music and hip-hop. Music was uploaded by artists, labels, promotion companies, fans, etc. Comments were mostly positive. Were full of profanity, caps, emoji, exclamation points. But also about features of the music, and stories of where the music was heard and what it meant. Few of the comments were part of conversation threads. One track had 77 comments with no replies. Uploader replies were almost as common as fan replies.
Similar to what Dana Rotman found with YouTube. The presence of affordances doesn't mean will form community.
The display could be better to support participation.
"A-social party" - expression and not interaction. Broadcasting, graffiti, co-presence, mutually shared experience.
Quan Zhou, Chei Sian Lee (Speaker), & Sei-Ching Joanna Sin - Using Social Media in Formal Learning: Investigating Learning Strategies and Satisfaction
Self-regulated learning (Pintrich, 2000, p453) - "an active constructive process whereby learners set goals ... then monitor regulate... constrained by ...goals... environment". forethought, performance control, self-reflection
survey - undergrad and grad students, if they used social media for any class, standard scales for learning strategies and satisfaction... n=270
PCA and regression. all 4 learning strategies significant. Goal setting most influential predictor of learning satisfaction. Self-evaluation second (social comparison - is a motivating force, unlike general studies of social media where comparison makes you unhappy). Keep in mind, their students are maybe more highly motivated than some other samples.
Limitations - didn't look at whether use was voluntary or mandatory. one university
q: how did you define social media? big list
q: did you ask for how the social media were used in the class? (no, not really?)