TY - JOUR
T1 - Motivating scholars’ responses in academic social networking sites
T2 - An empirical study on ResearchGate Q&A behavior
AU - Deng, Shengli
AU - Tong, Jingjing
AU - Lin, Yanqing
AU - Li, Hongxiu
AU - Liu, Yong
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - The advent of academic social networking sites (ASNS) has offered an unprecedented opportunity for scholars to obtain peer support online. However, little is known about the characteristics that make questions and answers popular among scholars on ASNS. Focused on the statements embedded in questions and answers, this study strives to explore the precursors that motivate scholars to respond, such as reading, following, or recommending a question or an answer. We collected empirical data from ResearchGate and coded the data via the act4teams coding scheme. Our analysis revealed a threshold effect—when the length of question description is over circa 150 words, scholars would quickly lose interest and thus not read the description. In addition, we found that questions, including positive action-oriented statements, are more likely to entice subsequent reads from other scholars. Furthermore, scholars prefer to recommend an answer with positive procedural statements or negative action-oriented statements.
AB - The advent of academic social networking sites (ASNS) has offered an unprecedented opportunity for scholars to obtain peer support online. However, little is known about the characteristics that make questions and answers popular among scholars on ASNS. Focused on the statements embedded in questions and answers, this study strives to explore the precursors that motivate scholars to respond, such as reading, following, or recommending a question or an answer. We collected empirical data from ResearchGate and coded the data via the act4teams coding scheme. Our analysis revealed a threshold effect—when the length of question description is over circa 150 words, scholars would quickly lose interest and thus not read the description. In addition, we found that questions, including positive action-oriented statements, are more likely to entice subsequent reads from other scholars. Furthermore, scholars prefer to recommend an answer with positive procedural statements or negative action-oriented statements.
KW - 512 Business and Management
KW - 113 Computer and information sciences
KW - Library and information science
KW - ResearchGate
KW - Social Q&A
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070729878&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102082
DO - 10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102082
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85070729878
SN - 0306-4573
VL - 56
JO - Information Processing & Management
JF - Information Processing & Management
IS - 6
M1 - 102082
ER -