Characterizing peer-judged answer quality on academic Q&A sites: A cross-disciplinary case study on ResearchGate. Issue 3 (30th July 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Li, Lei; He, Daqing; Zhang, Chengzhi; Geng, Li; Zhang, Ke
• Is Part Of: Aslib journal of information management. Volume 70:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: 269
• Page End: 287
• Publication Date: 2018-07-30
• Subjects: Social media -- Academic social networking -- ResearchGate -- Academic social Q&A -- Answer quality -- Peer judgment; Information science -- Periodicals; Library science -- Periodicals; 020.5
• DOI: 10.1108/AJIM-11-2017-0246
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2050-3806

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: Academic social (question and answer) Q&A sites are now utilised by millions of scholars and researchers for seeking and sharing discipline-specific information. However, little is known about the factors that can affect their votes on the quality of an answer, nor how the discipline might influence these factors. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach: Using 1, 021 answers collected over three disciplines (library and information services, history of art, and astrophysics) in ResearchGate, statistical analysis is performed to identify the characteristics of high-quality academic answers, and comparisons were made across the three disciplines. In particular, two major categories of characteristics of the answer provider and answer content were extracted and examined. Findings: The results reveal that high-quality answers on academic social Q&A sites tend to possess two characteristics: first, they are provided by scholars with higher academic reputations (e.g. more followers, etc.); and second, they provide objective information (e.g. longer answer with fewer subjective opinions). However, the impact of these factors varies across disciplines, e.g., objectivity is more favourable in physics than in other disciplines. Originality/value: The study is envisioned to help academic Q&A sites to select and recommend high-quality answers across different disciplines, especially in a cold-start scenario where the answer has not received enough judgements from peers.