Motivating scholars’ responses in academic social networking sites: An empirical study on ResearchGate Q&A behavior

Q&A participation and behavioral patterns on academic social networking sites: a comparative study of academic, corporate and government institutions on ResearchGate

Purpose

This paper aims to explore question and answer (Q&A) participation and behavioral patterns on academic social networking sites (ASNSs) from the perspective of multiple subjects such as academic, corporate and government institutions.

Design/methodology/approach

Focused on the Q&A service of ASNSs, this study chooses ResearchGate (RG) as the target ASNS and collects a large-scale data set from it, involving a sample of users and a Q&A sample about academic, corporate and government institutions. First, it studies the law of Q&A participation and the distribution of the type of user according to the sample of users. Second, it compares question-asking behavior and question-answering behavior stimulated by questions among the three types of institutions based on the Q&A sample. Finally, it discusses the Q&A participation and behavioral patterns of the three types of institutions in academic Q&A exchanges with full consideration of institutional attributes, and provides some suggestions for institutions and ASNSs.

Findings

The results show that these three types of institutions generally have a low level of participation in the Q&A service of RG, and the numbers of questions and answers proposed by institutional users conform to the power-law distribution. There are differences in Q&A participation and Q&A behavioral patterns among academic, corporate and government institutions. Government and academic institutions have more users participating in the Q&A service and their users are more willing to ask questions, while corporate institutions have fewer users who participate in the Q&A service and their users are inclined to provide answers. Questions from corporate institutions attract much more attention than those from the other two types of institutions.

Originality/value

This study reveals and compares the Q&A participation and the behavioral patterns of the three types of institutions in academic Q&A, thus deepening the understanding of the attributes of institutions in the academic information exchange context. In practice, the results can help guide different institutions to use the Q&A service of ASNSs more effectively and help ASNSs to better optimize their Q&A service.

An empirical study of Q&A websites for game developers

The game development industry is growing, and training new developers in game development-specific abilities is essential to satisfying its need for skilled game developers. These developers require effective learning resources to acquire the information they need and improve their game development skills. Question and Answer (Q&A) websites stand out as some of the most used online learning resources in software development. Many studies have investigated how Q&A websites help software developers become more experienced. However, no studies have explored Q&A websites aimed at game development, and there is little information about how game developers use and interact with these websites. In this paper, we study four Q&A communities by analyzing game development data we collected from their websites and the 347 responses received on a survey we ran with game developers. We observe that the communities have declined over the past few years and identify factors that correlate to these changes. Using a Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) model, we characterize the topics discussed in the communities. We also analyze how topics differ across communities and identify the most discussed topics. Furthermore, we find that survey respondents have a mostly negative view of the communities and tended to stop using the websites once they became more experienced. Finally, we provide recommendations on where game developers should post their questions, which can help mitigate the websites' declines and improve their effectiveness.