Title
Networks of digital humanities scholars: The informational and social uses and gratifications of Twitter
Abstract
Big Data research is currently split on whether and to what extent Twitter can be characterized as an informational or social network. We contribute to this line of inquiry through an investigation of digital humanities (DH) scholars' uses and gratifications of Twitter. We conducted a thematic analysis of 25 semi-structured interview transcripts to learn about these scholars' professional use of Twitter. Our findings show that Twitter is considered a critical tool for informal communication within DH invisible colleges, functioning at varying levels as both an information network (learning to 'Twitter' and maintaining awareness) and a social network (imagining audiences and engaging other digital humanists). We find that Twitter follow relationships reflect common academic interests and are closely tied to scholars' pre-existing social ties and conference or event co-attendance. The concept of the invisible college continues to be relevant but requires revisiting. The invisible college formed on Twitter is messy, consisting of overlapping social contexts (professional, personal and public), scholars with different habits of engagement, and both formal and informal ties. Our research illustrates the value of using multiple methods to explore the complex questions arising from Big Data studies and points toward future research that could implement Big Data techniques on a small scale, focusing on sub-topics or emerging fields, to expose the nature of scholars' invisible colleges made visible on Twitter.
Year
DOI
Venue
2015
10.1177/2053951715589417
BIG DATA & SOCIETY
Keywords
Field
DocType
Uses and gratifications,digital humanities (DH),scholars,Twitter,social media,Big Data,social networks
Thematic analysis,Data mining,Social media,Social network,Sociology,Digital humanities,Humanism,Big data,Informal communication,Interpersonal ties
Journal
Volume
Issue
ISSN
2
1
2053-9517
Citations 
PageRank 
References 
10
0.63
174
Authors
3
Search Limit
100174
Name
Order
Citations
PageRank
Anabel Quan-Haase144447.48
Kim Martin2726.80
Lori McCay-Peet319012.35