Reflection of attending Co-production of Knowledge Conference

1 08 2012

It has been two weeks since I presented my paper at the ‘Co-production of Knowledge: Social media, STS and…’ conference in the University of York. I have met a lot of interesting people who are doing similar research and I could possibly collaborate with in the future.

I presented my pilot study in the big theatre with 23 audiences, which was quite good attendance considering it was the afternoon of the last day of the 3 day conferences. Among the audience, we did a little survey and found about 1/4-1/3 of them had academic blogs. Some questions were raised, such as whether I’d analyse online content rather than interviewing people, whether there is a difference between blogs for research and for teaching students. These are good questions that I can reflect upon and consider in my future research.

Some presentations were very relevant to my research area and I also enjoyed meeting their presenters, such as Dominika Czerniawska with her Open Access paper, Mark Dang-Anh with his Twitter Algorithms paper. I missed Rene Konig’s presentation as it was at the same time as mine, but his research sounded really interesting and I’d love to learn more about it.

The downside of this trip to York was that I got food allergy and ended up in hospital emergency department on the first night. Staying in the York University campus and being so remote to city centre and all the resources didn’t help when I had problem at night time. Luckily I recovered quickly the next day and everything ran smoothly afterwards including my presentation on the last day. So the lesson is bringing all kinds of medication that might be needed and being careful next time—don’t get too tired! Conference could be very exhausting and stressful, especially when you are a PhD student with nerves!

Looking forward to my next conference trip though! 🙂



Presentation for social media conference

23 07 2012

I presented this at the conference ‘Co-Production of Knowledge: Social meida, STS and …’ in University of York, 18-20 July 2012. I welcome any comments and feedbacks. I’m also looking for interviewees who are UK based researchers regarding their reasons of using or not using social media for research. If you are interested, please let me know:

How to write an abstract for conferene paper

4 07 2012

I read a very interesting and help article called “How to write an abstract in 30 minutes” by Eva Lantsoght in her blog:

Her method is to write down a few questions in a blank document then fill in her answers. Those questions include the motivation, the problem statement, the approach for the problem, then result and conclusion.

In my case of social science, we might not be able to come up with the result when we write a conference abstract as the next few months before the conference might be the time to collect those data. But the general structure of those questions makes sense!

I recall the time when I wrote the abstract for an conference. It was a few hours before deadline and the situation forced me to push myself write an abstract without overthinking too much! Although I won’t recommend this approach to anyone, as we shouldn’t leave everything to the last minute!

Therefore, I might try out this new approach next time! Thanks for sharing, Eva!

Should we use social media for our research?

25 06 2012

My abstract “Should we use social media for our research?” has been accepted for presentation at the “Co-production of Knowledge: Social media, STS and…”Symposium which will take place from 18-20 July 2012 at the University of York. Further information about the conference is available at:

The abstract is as below:

Should we use social media for our research?

The globalisation of internet development has eliminated constraints of time and space and this breakthrough has led to many changes in the way people communicate with each other (Hewitt, 1998). These changes have also made their way into science and scholarly communication. While scholars used to depend on browsing the most relevant published papers to stay current with research in their field, or meeting face-to-face in meetings and conferences to exchange newest information and latest research findings, the adoption of online social media, such as academic blogs, Twitter, wikis and discussion forums has enabled a real-time communication and dissemination of scientific content (Maron and Smith, 2008, Neylon and Wu, 2009, Procter et al., 2010, Gu and Widén-Wulff, 2011).  However, the traditional practice of science is based on academic reward system that emphasis the priority of discovery (Merton, 1957). Would the use of blogs and micro-blogs compromise or even sabotage the academic reward system? Some scholars have criticized scientist bloggers who blog their research rather than waiting to publish their final result, as not fair on collaborators by leaking result and as to circumvent peer review process (Cox and Forshaw, 2011). Others praised web blog and social media to have provided great opportunities for a lively and stimulating scientific debate reaching beyond the research community which are valuable to the general public (Kendrew, 2011). This raises question that how to discuss new scientific findings which have not yet been peer-reviewed in an online public place. Should academic researchers use social media for research? If yes, how to adopt it properly?


This paper is based on pilot interviews with UK academic researchers, and the findings will be developed into survey questionnaires to get a representative sample. Around four to six qualitative interviews with UK academic researchers who use blogs and Twitter in their daily research life will be conducted to explore how they use social media to find information, getting ideas about their work, find peers to co-operate in a research project or co-write a paper, and disseminate scientific knowledge to a wider audience.  The findings determine to identify the pros and cons—the benefits and the problems of scholarly use of social media, predominately blogs and micro-blogs, and researchers’ concerns towards ownership and appropriate use of their online content. The study also explores the strategy that scholars use to make the adoption of social media benefit their work to the maximum. 

Another six to eight interviews with researchers who have not adopted social media tend to explore the reason of resistance and investigate possible strategies to enhance their trust of social media and the confidence that the benefits of using social media outrace the efforts. Understanding why some academics choose not to adopt social media is an important part of a critical approach in identifying the boundaries and difficulties of social media as a medium for scholarly communication. Novel forms of science practice have challenged the traditional norm of science and only a majority acknowledgement of these new forms will lead to the shift of the whole system. More empirical research need to be done to test the feasibility of full adoption of social media and set regulation for the new practice.




COX, B. & FORSHAW, J. 2011. Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw explain the big bang [Online]. Guardian. Available: [Accessed 6 Feb 2012].

GU, F. & WIDÉN-WULFF, G. 2011. Scholarly communication and possible changes in the context of social media: A Finnish case study. Electronic Library, The, 29, 762-776.

HEWITT, P. 1998. Technology and democracy. In: FRANKLIN, J. (ed.) The Politics of Risk Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

KENDREW, S. 2011. Brian Cox is wrong: blogging your research is not a recipe for disaster [Online]. Guardian. Available: [Accessed 3 Feb 2012].

MARON, N. L. & SMITH, K. K. 2008. Current Models of Digital Scholarly Communication: Results of an Investigation Conducted by Ithaka for the Association of Research Libraries. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries.

MERTON, R. K. 1957. Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, 22, 635-659.

NEYLON, C. & WU, S. 2009. Article-level metrics and the evolution of scientific impact. PLoS Biol, 7, e1000242.

PROCTER, R., WILLIAMS, R., STEWART, J., POSCHEN, M., SNEE, H., VOSS, A. & ASGARI-TARGHI, M. 2010. Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in scholarly communications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 368.