*This workshop has been proposed for the WebScience Conference 2014, Bloomington, USA (http://www.websci14.org*), and awaits approval. ****
Short background and description
The prevalence of social media is obvious in the daily life of Internet users, for example, 73% of Internet users are members of social networks (Pew Research Center, 2014) and 200 million were active on Twitter in March of 2013 (Wickre, 2013).At a slow pace, social media presence is also increasingly common in the “ivory tower”, where social media is used for scholarly communication, research collaboration, science evaluation (i.e., altmetrics), and teaching (JISC, 2012). Such changes in the practice and evaluation of scholarship have transformed contemporary work into a veritable Science2.0.
Science 2.0 deals with the investigation of new fields for research and development, originating from the application of new participative and collaborative Internet technologies in all phases of research. Hence, in Science 2.0 we are confronted with social media that simultaneously functions as a laboratory providing the environment for research (e.g., file sharing systems), a tool box assisting in performing research and scholarly communication (e.g., dissemination of research results via (micro-) blogging), and as objects to be studied (e.g., user networks or content analyses).
The Web, and Social Media in particular, has been the driving force behind the evolution of Science 2.0 and is its constitutional element. However, the conceptual, theoretical, technical, semantic, or personal relations between Science 2.0 and Web Science have yet to be discussed. Is Science 2.0 a specialized Web Science determined by its research object (i.e., science)? If and to what extent can Web Science provide methods for understanding Science 2.0? Are Web Science and Science 2.0 related closely enough to require integrative modes of study?
Science 2.0, not unlike Web Science, is subject to complex, interdisciplinary dynamics driving its development. Hence, research of Science 2.0 is grounded on three pillars and associated research questions:
1) Technology development: How can Social Media support existing research processes? How can today’s research processes be innovated by Science 2.0 tools?
2) Research habits: how do the Web and social media influence research and publication processes?
3) Usage and user behavior: how and in what ways does scholarly communication react to the Web and social media?
For the workshop we invite contributions that address these topical foci and research questions (also in combination with the following non-exclusive list of specific aspects of Science 2.0).
- Science 2.0: conceptualization, constitutional elements and theoretical framework(s)
- Definition and Disambiguation of concepts related to Science 2.0, e.g., e-Science, Cyberscience, Open Science, “Digital Disciplines” (as in Digital Humanities), …
- Science 2.0 vs. Web Science: parent-child relationship or siblings or unrelated?
- Science 2.0 and information service providers, e.g., libraries, database providers, …
- Science 2.0 applications and best practices
- Science 2.0 and Big Data
- Citizen science and Science 2.0
- Science 2.0 policies, guidelines, technical and organizational requirements, personal skills, and incentive systems
- Evaluation of Science 2.0, e.g., altmetrics, open peer review, …
- Perception of Science 2.0 in academia and the general public
- Science 2.0 hazards: barriers, problems, limits, access to data, reproducibility of data, plagiarism, intellectual property, and copyright, ....
- Sustainability of Science 2.0, e.g., persistent identifiers, dependence on commercial third-party systems (e.g., Twitter)
Schedule of sessions
The proposed workshop will be a half day event (or full day workshop depending on the number of submissions) where two keynote speakers will provide practical and theoretical views on Science 2.0. The opening keynote should stimulate workshop participants with a more theoretical discussion of Science 2.0, whereas the closing keynote will present actual examples of Science 2.0 in practice. The remainder of the workshop will focus on presentations of contributed research papers which will be chosen by a CfP. We aim to provide a broad platform for contributors of different disciplines to better infuse the understanding of Science 2.0 and lay the groundwork for interdisciplinary discussions between workshop participants. As required in the conference description, the Science 2.0 workshop will contribute to the understanding of how people (i.e., researchers), organizations (i.e., research centers), and applications (i.e., Social Media) shape and are shaped by the Web. The tentative schedule of the workshop is as follows:
Opening remarks by the workshop committee
Presentation of research papers
Presentation of research papers
Closing remarks by the workshop committee
Names of (potential) invited speakers
Klaus Tochtermann, Director of ZBW, Kiel, is the initiator of the Leibniz-research network “Science 2.0” which joints forces of more than 30 universities, information services, libraries, and research institutions. Within the next ten years, the network will follow a highly interdisciplinary research approach to find relevant answers to today’s and future questions in the area of Science 2.0. The network will bundle and exploit existing synergies among its participants resulting in a notably high “group intelligence”. Tochtermann is already confirmed to present at the workshop if the proposal is accepted.
The second keynote speaker has yet to be confirmed. The organizing committee contacted Michael Nentwich (Institute of Technology Assessment, Vienna) who is widely known for his studies on Cyberscience and the influence of the Internet on society and science.
Selection criteria for papers to be presented
A call for papers will be sent out asking specifically for papers with a focus on research related to the above mentioned topics. Submissions should briefly (up to 1000 words) explain the research questions, methods, frameworks, results and discussion We especially invite papers on ongoing research which may spark discussion across participants and will benefit from a broad reflection of the presented study. The organizing committee, together with a board of reviewers from the Web Science and Science 2.0 communities, will select the papers to be presented as 20-minute oral presentations. Free slots in the schedule will be filled with invited talks. Short papers and presentations will be published on the workshop website.
Details will follow
We expect to attract a large number of participants, because of the strong interdisciplinary character of the workshop that aims at joining research and best practices from different backgrounds (i.e., scholarly and professional). Also the increased “digitization” of traditional disciplines (as in Digital Humanities) has raised interest on the Web, triggered research in Science 2.0, and allowed for less computer science-focused researchers step onto the stage. They are eager to exchange methods, data sets, ideas and know-how, and to raise awareness of research challenges in particular fields. Due to increasing popular interest in Science 2.0, e.g., in political discussions and strategies, we also expect attendance of decision makers and practitioners from publicly funded organizations, information service providers, publishers, and politics, too.
The workshop will be widely advertised on various discussion lists and on Social Media. Given that the Science 2.0 community itself, as well as the organizing committee, is well-connected via diverse Social Media channels, we expect a strong word-of-mouth effect supporting the promotion of the workshop across different disciplines. The workshop will also be announced within the Leibniz Research Network as well as at the Science 2.0 conference (only invited speakers) held in the end of March in Kiel (http://www.science20-conference.de).
Isabella Peters, ZBW Leibniz Information Center for Economics and Christian Albrechts University Kiel, Germany (http://www.zbw.eu/ueber_uns/profile/isabella-peters.htm)
Wolfgang Nejdl, L3S Research Center and Leibniz University Hannover, Germany (http://www.l3s.de/visitenkarte/id/wolfgang-nejdl)
Claudia Wagner, GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences and University of Koblenz, Germany (http://claudiawagner.info)
Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, USA (http://ils.indiana.edu/faculty/spotlight/index.php?facid=247)
Board of reviewers (to be confirmed)
JISC (2012). Researchers of tomorrow. The research behaviour of Generation Y doctoral students. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/reports/2012/Researchers-of-Tomorrow.pdf.
Pew Research Center (2014). Social Media Update 2013. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Social-Media-Update.aspx
Wickre, K. (March 21, 2013). Celebrating #Twitter7. Retrieved from https://blog.twitter.com/2013/celebrating-twitter7