Research scientists and social networks (part 1)

Next week, I’m going to post a few thoughts on the development of social networks by publishers.

'Ah, that's what you write about most days', you say! Well yes - but this time, I'm going to be looking at one group of people in particular - the research science community.

Why? Well, let's take a step back. When we think about social networks, we tend to assume that their tentacles of influence will reach into every single market in the world. It's unstoppable.

But is that right in the case of research scientists? After all, there are some differences in the way scientists work, compared to say lawyers or students or nurses. Research scientists have different information requirements. They have different methods of sharing information. And most of all they have different issues to do with data sensitivity.

So, at any level, we shouldn't assume that research scientists are as likely as any other constituency to dive head-first into social networks. It may be true, but we shouldn't assume that ...

As a structure for this series of posts, I'm working on the premise that for a social network to succeed, it relies on the following assumptions. It pre-supposes:

1. that they have something they want to share
   
2. that they want to share it


3. that they have time to share it

In other words, if it’s going to secure a critical mass of users, a social network needs to have people with something to write about, a reason to write about it, and time to actually do it.

And I'm just going to be asking: is that true in this case of the research science community?

Keep your eyes peeled for more next week...