iMech

Many scientists are making the move towards social media in order to accelerate  and amplify their scientific impact (Fausto et al. 2012; Fox 2012; Piwowar 2013). One in 40 scientists is active on Twitter (Priem et al. 2012a), 25,000 blog entries have been indexed on the Research Blogging platform, and 2 million scientists are using Mendeley, a reference sharing tool (Piwowar 2013). Here, we consider 140 how social media, and Twitter in particular, can influence the life cycle of scientific publication, from inception and collaboration on a spark of an idea to the communication of a finished product. Specifically, we evaluate and discuss the benefits of Twitter for (1) increasing scholarly connections and networks, (2) quickly developing ideas through novel collaborations and pre-review, and (3) amplifying the dissemination and discussion of scientific knowledge both within and beyond the ivory tower of academia.

The impact of scientific papers has traditionally been measured in terms of
numbers of citations (Neylon and Wu 2009). Tweeting can influence this impact metric. For example, articles published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research that were tweeted about frequently in the first three days following publication were 11 times more likely to be highly cited 17 to 29 months later than  less tweeted articles (Eysenbach 2011). In fact, top-cited articles could be predicted quite accurately from their early tweeting frequency (Eysenbach 2011). In a separate study of ~4600 scientific articles published in the preprint database  arXiv.org, Shuai et al. (2012) found that papers with more mentions on Twitter were also associated with more downloads and early citations of papers, although the causality of these relationships is unclear (Shuai et al. 2012).

Paper available on PeerJ discusses the role of Twitter in the lifecycle of a scientific publication.

estudo conclui que o Twitter contribui para a publicação científica no século 21

Very good descriptive account of the rise of serious games, right up to the present day.

This article does a great job and helping us realize the real and perceived reasons why people feel that reading on paper is more benefitial for them. At this point in history, people do tend to remember more if they read from paper.  We can often remember which region of a page we learned something even if we read it several weeks ago.  We like the transition of one side of the book being heavier than the other as we progress through the pages.  Book designers take great efforts to design how books look, feel and smell.  Digital books are disrupting our experience and interaction with the written text.  Many people are in a mental state before reading a printed text that it is more serious and meaningful.  This mindset may be changing how we engage the brain and thus how much we remember.

But why, one could ask, are we working so hard to make reading with new technologies like tablets and e-readers so similar to the experience of reading on the very ancient technology that is paper? Why not keep paper and evolve screen-based reading into something else entirely? Screens obviously offer readers experiences that paper cannot. Scrolling may not be the ideal way to navigate a text as long and dense as Moby Dick, but the New York Times, Washington Post, ESPN and other media outlets have created beautiful, highly visual articles that depend entirely on scrolling and could not appear in print in the same way. Some Web comics andinfographics turn scrolling into a strength rather than a weakness. Similarly, Robin Sloan has pioneered the tap essay for mobile devices. The immensely popular interactive Scale of the Universe tool could not have been made on paper in any practical way. New e-publishing companies like Atavist offer tablet readers long-form journalism with embedded interactive graphics, maps, timelines, animations and sound tracks. And some writers are pairing up with computer programmers to produce ever more sophisticated interactive fiction and nonfiction in which one's choices determine what one reads, hears and sees next.

When it comes to intensively reading long pieces of plain text, paper and ink may still have the advantage. But text is not the only way to read.

Do you have enough information to make a decision?

"MOOCs were not designed to serve the missions of the elite colleges and universities. They were designed to undermine them, and make those missions obsolete. Yes there has been a great rebranding and co-option of the concept of the MOOC over the last couple of years. The near-instant response from the elites, almost unprecedented in my experience, is a recognition of the deeply subversive intent and design of the original MOOCs (which they would like very much to erase from history)."

The  adoption of Moocs by institutions and what they were created for

"MOOCs were not designed to serve the missions of the elite colleges and universities. They were designed to undermine them, and make those missions obsolete. Yes there has been a great rebranding and co-option of the concept of the MOOC over the last couple of years. The near-instant response from the elites, almost unprecedented in my experience, is a recognition of the deeply subversive intent and design of the original MOOCs (which they would like very much to erase from history)."

I make a brief cameo appearance in this video when Marty talks about the YouTube Inbox

Actually, it's more like my name makes an appearance not me but you know what I mean. hehe 

Great overview which I will use as an additional resource in our help area for staff and learners using media.

Handy resources, indeed! Thank you :)