Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Information Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0165551509104232v1
35/5/613    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Matzat, U.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Disciplinary differences in the use of internet discussion groups: differential communication needs or trust problems?

Uwe Matzat

Eindhoven University of Technology, MB Eindhoven, Netherlands,u.matzat{at}tue.nl

This paper tests empirically the claim that the successful application of information and communication technologies (ICTs) depends on the social context of their use. There are striking differences in the prevalence of ICT use between researchers in different academic disciplines. Nevertheless it is unclear whether and how they depend on disciplinary differences of the academic communication system. This paper presents several existing and new hypotheses that specify how disciplinary differences in communication systems influence whether researchers make use of so-called internet discussion groups (IDGs). The hypotheses either argue that specific trust problems inhibit IDG subscription or that IDGs fulfil discipline-specific communication needs, which gives incentives for subscription. They are tested with data of a sample of university researchers in the natural and social sciences and the humanities. The trust hypotheses are not confirmed. The idea that IDGs have a distinct orientation function that diminishes deficiencies in the existing communication systems of some disciplines finds support. Scholars who work in research fields that are difficult to overview, that is fields with a high number of journals, have a special incentive to subscribe to IDGs.

Key Words: information search • knowledge sharing • online community • scholarly communication

This version was published on October 1, 2009

Journal of Information Science, Vol. 35, No. 5, 613-631 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0165551509104232


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?