ABSTRACT Title of Document: THE ROLE OF NEW INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES (ICTS) IN INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION IN SCIENCE. A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND EMPIRICAL STUDY Christina K. Pikas, Ph.D., 2016 Directed By: Professor Emeritus Dagobert Soergel, College of Information Studies Problem This dissertation presents a literature-based framework for communication in science (with the elements partners, purposes, message, and channel), which it then applies in and amends through an empirical study of how geoscientists use two social computing technologies (SCTs), blogging and Twitter (both general use and tweeting from conferences). How are these technologies used and what value do scientists derive from them? Method The empirical part used a two-pronged qualitative study, using (1) purposive samples of ~400 blog posts and ~1000 tweets and (2) a purposive sample of 8 geoscientist interviews. Blog posts, tweets, and interviews were coded using the framework, adding new codes as needed. The results were aggregated into 8 geoscientist case studies, and general patterns were derived through cross-case analysis. Results A detailed picture of how geoscientists use blogs and twitter emerged, including a number of new functions not served by traditional channels. Some highlights: Geoscientists use SCTs for communication among themselves as well as with the public. Blogs serve persuasion and personal knowledge management; Twitter often amplifies the signal of traditional communications such as journal articles. Blogs include tutorials for peers, reviews of basic science concepts, and book reviews. Twitter includes links to readings, requests for assistance, and discussions of politics and religion. Twitter at conferences provides live coverage of sessions. Conclusions Both blogs and Twitter are routine parts of scientists' communication toolbox, blogs for in-depth, well-prepared essays, Twitter for faster and broader interactions. Both have important roles in supporting community building, mentoring, and learning and teaching. The Framework of Communication in Science was a useful tool in studying these two SCTs in this domain. The results should encourage science administrators to facilitate SCT use of scientists in their organization and information providers to search SCT documents as an important source of information. THE ROLE OF NEW INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES (ICTS) IN INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION IN SCIENCE. A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND EMPIRICAL STUDY By Christina Kirk Pikas Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2016 Advisory Committee: Professor Dagobert Soergel, Chair Professor Jennifer Preece Associate Professor Linda Aldoory Assistant Professor Jessica Vitak Dr. Kenneth Fleischmann © 2016 Christina K. Pikas This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dagobert Soergel, for encouraging me to embark upon this crazy long road and sticking by me over the last decade. His advice and support has kept me going. I also thank my dissertation committee members, Jennifer Preece, Linda Aldoory, Jessica Vitak, and Kenneth Fleischmann, for their advice, questions, and encouragement. My employer, the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, has been tremendously supportive of my PhD work – all eleven years of it! Paying tuition and fees in advance, providing educational leave, providing access to the literature, and flexible policies that have allowed me to work on this project. All of the scientists and engineers who have gently nudged me along, too! My co-workers, too, have been hugely supportive, taking on some of my load so I can get this done (Thank you Carol Brueggemeier and Ashley Arnold in particular). The bosses I have had, Susan Fingerman, Bob Gresehover, Judith Theodori, and Kristine Harshaw did not bat an eye at the idea that I might pursue a PhD and accommodated a flexible schedule so I could carve out time for writing. The Geoscientists who have participated in my study and responded to questions afterward have been truly wonderful. It’s been such a pleasure reading your tweets and blogs. A big thank you to the Library Society of the World for support, encouragement, and questions answered. Finally, thanks go to my sister Maggie Osborne who never had any doubt I could do this and offered to baby sit to give me time to get it done; to my parents, Gail and Howard Kirk who have always encouraged me; and to my mother in law for watching my babies so I could get more work done! iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. ii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... x 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Research Questions ..................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Importance and Contributions ..................................................................................... 6 1.3.1 A Comprehensive Framework for Describing and Analyzing Communication in Science 6 1.3.2 Findings Will be Useful for Various Actors who Aim to Improve Science Communication ................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Organization of the dissertation .................................................................................. 9 2. Literature Review and Framework .......................................................................... 10 2.0 Framework of Communication in Science. Overview .............................................. 10 2.0.1 Outline of the Framework of Communication in Science as used in coding ..... 11 2.0.2 Introduction to the Framework of Communication in Science .......................... 14 2.1 Features of the Communication Partners .................................................................. 15 2.1.1 Audience Size or Number of Communication Partners ..................................... 16 2.1.2 Individual Features of the Communication Partners ......................................... 17 2.1.3 Match of and Relationship among or between Communication Partners .......... 20 2.2 Purpose of the communication activity ..................................................................... 22 2.2.1 Dissemination .................................................................................................... 23 2.2.2 Preservation........................................................................................................ 24 2.2.3 Validation or Certification of Content ............................................................... 24 2.2.4 Discourse or Contributing to the Conversation ................................................. 26 2.2.5 Societal Benefit or Applications ........................................................................ 26 2.2.6 Identity ............................................................................................................... 27 2.2.7 Rewards.............................................................................................................. 27 iv 2.2.8 Learning, teaching, or assessment ..................................................................... 27 2.2.9 Persuasion .......................................................................................................... 28 2.2.10 Evaluation or Opinion ........................................................................................ 28 2.2.11 Coordination ...................................................................................................... 29 2.2.12 Social.................................................................................................................. 29 2.2.13 Entertainment ..................................................................................................... 31 2.3 Features of the message or content ............................................................................ 31 2.3.1 Topic .................................................................................................................. 32 2.3.2 Type of content .................................................................................................. 32 2.3.3 Register .............................................................................................................. 36 2.3.4 Language ............................................................................................................ 37 2.3.5 Structure ............................................................................................................. 37 2.3.6 Persistence.........................................................................................................