Presented at the STI Conference held in Valencia on September 16, 2016.

1. STI Conference 2016| Valencia
September 14-16, 2016
SSH & the City.
A network approach for tracing the societal
contribution of the Social Sciences and
Humanities for local development
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia, Thed N. van Leeuwen & Ismael Ràfols

2. Index
Rationale
Alternative frameworks
Towards a network approach
Some results
Discussion

3. EVALUATION SCHEMES address…
Rationale
1. Natural & Exact Sciences
2. Global Communities Internationalization
3. Scientific Impact

4. EVALUATION SCHEMES neglect…
Rationale
1. Social Sciences & Humanities
2. Local Communities
3. Societal Impact
Only socioeconomic and with limitations

5. The attribution problem
Researcher
Paper
Citation
Progress
SCIENTIFIC IMPACT

6. The attribution problem
Researcher
Paper?
Project?
????
Progress
SOCIETAL IMPACT

7. From impact to process
indicators
“The introduction of knowledge about the
process into assessment procedures will
also help us to understand how
(potential) social impact is being
achieved.”
Spaapen & Drooge, 2011

8. From impact to process
indicators
RESEARCH QUESTION
Can we identify these processes?
HYPOTHESIS
Social media as a way tracing interactions
between researchers and non-academics

9. From Impact to Process
Third Stream Metrics
Productive interactions
Knowledge Value Alliances
Theoreticalframeworks

10. Third Stream Metrics
Molas-Gallart et al., 2002
University
Activities
Contract
research
Collaboration
networks
Capabilities
Patents Spin-offs

11. Productive interactions
SCIENCE
SOCIETY
Productive
interactions
Spaapen & Drooge, 2011

12. Productive interactions
Spaapen & Drooge, 2011
Direct interactions personal – email
Indirect interactions texts – artifacts
Financial interactions contracts - funding

13. Knowledge Value
Alliances
COLLECTIVE A
COLLECTIVE B
COLLECTIVE C
Knowledge Value
Alliances
Rogers & Bozeman, 2001

14. Towards a network
approach
Capabilities and activities
=
Nodes and flows

15. Towards a network
approach
1. Mutuals network of academic A 2. Levels of outreach
A
B
C
3. Characterised mutuals local network
LEGEND
A Global research network
B Local/global profesional network
C Local network
Node colours represent organisation to which a
tweep belongs.

16. Twitter and other social media
Web-links
Contracts, spin-off, patents
Publications in Google Scholar
Publications in Scopus/WoS
MorelocalMoreglobal
ScientificimpactSocietalimpact
Social media and
informal interactions

17. Web-link analysis
FAIL!

18. Social media and
informal interactions
The value of Twitter
 Community building capacity
 Combination between private and professional
interests
 Escaping from the ‘publication-focused’
approach
Non-academics do not necessarily read papers

19. Some results
Edwin Horlings’ social community in Twitter

20. Some results
Edwin Horlings’ social community in Twitter
Geographical proximity
LOCAL
GLOBAL

21. Some results
Ludo Waltman’s social community in Twitter

22. Some results
Geographical proximity
LOCAL
GLOBAL
Ludo Waltman’s social community in Twitter

23. Measuring vs. mapping
 Turning from ‘evaluative’ assessment to
‘strategic’ assessment
Usefulness as a policy tool?
 Mapping as a first step/complement to
qualitative approaches
Indicators vs. Visualisations
 Societal impact is difficult to grasp, social
engagement maybe a prior step towards it

24. Measuring vs. mapping
 Where does social engagement takes
place?
• Finding the appropriate traces
 There are many data restrictions and
limitations using social media
• Characterising users
• Levels of aggregation

25. Further steps
 Analysis of social communities of scientists
using different data sources (LinkedIn, Google
Scholar…)
 Cross-validation of the network
 Overlaying discourse
ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS ARE WELCOME!

26. STI Conference 2016| Valencia
September 14-16, 2016
Thank you!
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia, Thed N. van Leeuwen & Ismael Ràfols