Abstract
This study investigated a descriptive crosssectional study conducted among Social Science scholars on academic social media for network communication study at Selected Universities in Tamil Nadu, social science researchers provide information about their work via social media platforms. The data were collected from an online questionnaire, and a link to the online survey was shared through Gmail and Whatsapp. The study participants were 302 scholars from social science areas at the Selected University of Tamil Nadu. Data were analyzed using the Software for statistical analysis, SPSS 23 version. The normality test and nonparametric analyses (basic percentage, mean and standard deviation, and Mann-Whitney U test) were used to check the received data to produce the study's findings.
Key Words: Social Media, Scholarly Research Communication, Academic Social Media, Research performance, Selected Universities and Purpose
1. Alhoori, H., Samaka, M., Furuta, R., & Fox, E. A. (2018). Anatomy of scholarly information behavior patterns in the wake of academic social media platforms. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 20(4), 369–389.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-018-0255-9
2. Baskaran, C. (2018). Use of Social Networks (SNs) and Medias on Dissemination of Scholarly information among the Research Scholars in Alagappa University, Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu. Journal of Advances in Library and Information Science, 7(3), 257-261.
3. Baskaran, C. (2019). Scholarly Information Share through Social Networks (SNs) and Medias among Social Science Scholars in selected State Universities in Tamilnadu. International Journal of Library and Information Studies, 9(3), 83-92.
4. Baskaran, C., & Pitchaipandi, P. (2021). Research scholars transferring scholarly information through social medias and networks in the selected State Universities of Tamil Nadu. Computer Networks, Big Data and IoT, 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0965-7_15
http://eprints.rclis.org/39683/1/SC2018.pdf5. Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2017). Networked scholarship and motivations for social media use in scholarly communication. The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.2859
6. Miller, R. C., & Tsai, C. J. (2020). Scholarly Publishing in the wake of COVID-19. International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics, 108(2), 491–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.06.048
7. Mügge, L. M. (2016). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide in comparative migration studies: Newspaper Data, and political ethnography in mixed method research. Comparative Migration Studies, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-016- 0036-9
8. Mukherjee, B. (2012). Information, communication and Society. Ess Ess Publications.
9. Pagliarin, S., La Mendola, S., & Vis, B. (2022). The “qualitative” in qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): Research Moves, case-intimacy and face-to-face interviews. Quality & Quantity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01358-0
10. 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: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368(1926), 4039–4056. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0155
11. Srinivasa Rao Y. (2018). Scholarly Communication Cycle: SWOT Analysis. AIJR Abstracts, 9.
12. Sugimoto, C. R., Sugimoto, T. J., Tsou, A., Milojević, S., & Larivière, V. (2016). Age stratification and cohort effects in scholarly communication: A Study of Social Sciences. Scientometrics, 109(2), 997–1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2087-y