Institutional repositories and academic social networks as complementary infrastructures in 21st Century Scientific Communication
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3145/infonomy.25.036Keywords:
Institutional repositories, Academic social networks, Open science, Digital preservation, Interoperability, Metadata, Open access, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, Rebiun, ENCA, Aneca, Self-archivingAbstract
This article analyzes the differences and complementarities between institutional repositories and academic social networks within the scientific communication ecosystem. It begins with a literature review and an analysis of articles in repositories and on ResearchGate, comparing their availability with data from the Rebiun report on open access in Spain (2023). The results show that 80% of articles are open access, but only 46% are accessible in full text in repositories. In contrast, of a sample of 500 articles from the same study, 99% are available on ResearchGate, but only 59% offer full access. Conversely, risks associated with social networks are documented, such as mass content removal, opaque metrics, and commercial dependence. The main conclusion is that both infrastructures are complementary: repositories guarantee regulatory compliance and preservation, while social networks provide visibility and networking opportunities. An integrated coexistence model is recommended, where the institutional repository acts as the authoritative source and social networks as complementary dissemination channels. Objective: To analyze the differences and complementarities between academic repositories and academic social networks, with special attention to research visibility and preservation, as well as the monitoring of open access mandates. Methodology: Systematic review of scientific literature, Rebiun/Fecyt guidelines, open access reports, and comparative analysis of recent cases and statistics on the adoption of repositories and academic social networks. Results: Institutional repositories guarantee long-term preservation, interoperability, and compliance with open access mandates. Rebiun data show that open access in Spain grew to 80% by 2023. Up to 46% of articles are located with full text in repositories, while, in a sample of 500 articles from the same study, 99% are present in open access repositories, but only 59% offer full access. In contrast, academic social networks offer immediate visibility and networking opportunities, but face opaque metrics, mass content removal, and dependence on commercial models. Conclusions: There is no competition, but rather complementarity, between institutional repositories and academic social networks. Repositories constitute the official archive that guarantees preservation, interoperability, and regulatory compliance, while social networks act as complementary channels for dissemination and networking, without replacing the institutional archive.References
Aguillo, Isidro F.; Ortega, José Luis; Fernández, Mario; Utrilla, Ana M. (2010). Indicators for a webometric ranking of open access repositories. Scientometrics, 82(3), 477-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0183-y
Arroyo-Machado, Wenceslao; Torres-Salinas, Daniel (2025). Incentives accelerate progress on open access in Spain. Nature, v. 646, n. 8084. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-03276-1
Bernal-Martínez, Isabel; Perakakis, Pandelis (2023). No-pay publishing: use institutional repositories. Nature, 620, 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02315-z
Boliini, Andrea; Knoth, Peter; Perakakis, Pandelis; Rodrigues, Eloy; Shearer, Kathleen; Van de Sompel, Herbert; Walk, Paul (2017). Next generation repositories: behaviours and technical recommendations of the COAR Next Generation Repository Working Group. https://zenodo.org/records/8077381
Borrego, Ángel (2017). Institutional repositories versus ResearchGate: The depositing habits of Spanish researchers. Learned Publishing, 30(3), 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1099
Chaffey, Dave (2025). Global social media statistics research summary 2025. Smart Insights. https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research
Coalition for Responsible Sharing (2019). Status report on ResearchGate. http://www.responsiblesharing.org/2019-06-13-status-report-on-researchgate-june-2019
Corker, Katie (2017). Bye bye, academia.edu and ResearchGate–hello PsyArXiv! Science of psych. https://scienceofpsych.wordpress.com/2017/08/18/bye-bye-academia-edu-and-researchgate-hello-psyarxiv
Couto Torres, Dayana; Pedroso Borrero, Idanis Milagros; Carvajal Hernández, Bárbara María (2025). La identidad digital del docente universitario en el ecosistema digital de ciencia abierta. Transformación, 21, e569. https://transformacion.reduc.edu.cu/index.php/transformacion/article/view/569
Crow, Raym (2002). The case for institutional repositories: a SPARC position paper. ARL Bimonthly Report 223, 37 pp. https://ils.unc.edu/courses/2014_fall/inls690_109/Readings/Crow2002-CaseforInstitutionalRepositoriesSPARCPaper.pdf
De Castro, Pablo; Shearer, Kathleen; Summann, Friedrich (2014). The gradual merger of repository and CRIS solutions to meet institutional research information management requirements. Procedia Computer Science, 33, 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.06.007
Delgado-Vázquez, Ángel M. (2024). De las revistas tradicionales a las plataformas abiertas: ¿hacia una red pública de publicación científica? Anuario ThinkEPI, vol. 19. https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2025.e19a10
Dinu, Nicoleta-Roxana (2024). Tendencias de uso de repositorios y redes sociales académicas para dar visibilidad a los artículos científicos en Información, Documentación y Comunicación. Profesional de la información, 33(4). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2024.0403
Enago (2017). ResearchGate removes 1.7 million articles in copyright conflict. Enago Academy. https://www.enago.com/academy/researchgate-removes-1-7-million-articles-copyright-conflict
Estrategia Nacional de Ciencia Abierta (ENCA) (2023). Estrategia Nacional de Ciencia Abierta 2023-2027. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación. https://www.ciencia.gob.es/en/Estrategias-y-Planes/Estrategias/ENCA.html
Eva, Nicole C.; Wiebe, Tara A. (2019). Whose research is it anyway? Academic social networks versus institutional repositories. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2243
Fecyt-Rebiun (2020). Guía para la evaluación de los procesos de preservación en repositorios institucionales de investigación. https://repositorio.rebiun.org/handle/20.500.11967/634
Fecyt-Rebiun (2021). Guía para la evaluación de repositorios institucionales de investigación. https://calidadrevistas.fecyt.es/sites/default/files/informes/2021guiaevaluacionrecolecta_vf.pdf
Frampton, Geoff; Woods, Lois; Scott, David Alexander (2021). Inconsistent and incomplete retraction of published research: A cross-sectional study on Covid-19 retractions and recommendations to mitigate risks for research, policy and practice. PLoS One, 16(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258935
Jordan, Katy (2019). From social networks to publishing platforms: A review of the history and scholarship of academic social network sites. Frontiers in Digital Humanities, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2019.00005
Kemp, Simon (2025). Digital 2026: 2 de cada 3 personas en la Tierra usan redes sociales. DataReportal. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2026-two-in-three-people-use-social-media
Kilcer, Emily; Puzier, Lauren; Germain, Carole Anne (2025). Making the Connection: An Examination of Institutional Repositories and Scholarly Communication Crosslinking Practices. College & Research Libraries, 86(3), 449–468. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.86.3.449
Lynch, Clifford A. (2003). Institutional repositories: essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. Portal: Libraries and the Academy 3(2), 327-336. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2003.0039
Martínez-Galindo, Francisco-Jesús (2020). Similitudes y diferencias entre repositorios y redes sociales. Revista PH, 100, pp. 127-129. https://doi.org/10.33349/2020.100.4670
Martínez-Galindo, Francisco-Jesús; Rubio, Francisco; Fernández-Burguete, Sergio (2022). Monitorización de los mandatos de acceso abierto a través de repositorios institucionales. Profesional de la información, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.mar.04
Masawe, Suzan; Muneja, Paul; Msonge, Vincent (2024). University students motives and challenges in utilising institutional repository resources. arXiv:2401.17959. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.17959
Melero, Remedios; Abadal, Ernest; Abad, Francisca; Rodríguez-Gairín, Josep-Manuel (2009). The situation of open access institutional repositories in Spain: 2009 report. Information Research, 14(4). http://informationr.net/ir/14-4/paper415.html
Nguer-Rivero, Amina (2021). Análisis de documentos de acceso gratuito en ResearchGate: acceso abierto e infracciones de copyright [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Granada].
Orduña-Malea, Enrique (2025). Sharing gray academic literature with ResearchGate DOIs: Increased discoverability but inaccurate metadata. Journal of Data and Information Science, 0(0), 2025. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2025-0039
Ortega, José Luis (2015). Disciplinary differences in the use of academic social networking sites. Online Information Review, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2015-0093
Rebiun (2023). Medición del acceso abierto en las universidades españolas y el CSIC (2019-2023). https://doi.org/10.21950/BOMYUU
Rebiun (2024). En defensa de los repositorios de acceso abierto. Red de Bibliotecas Universitarias y Científicas Españolas. https://www.rebiun.org/noticias/2024/en-defensa-de-los-repositorios-de-acceso-abierto
Rebiun (2025). Evaluación de la investigación en el marco de la ciencia abierta. Informe técnico. https://repositoriorebiun.org/handle/20.500.11967/1454
ResearchGate (2025). About us. https://www.researchgate.net/aboutus.About.html
Rodrigues, Eloy; Clobridge, Abby (2011). Institutional repositories, scholarly communication, and scholarly publishing: We need to think outside the box. Against the Grain, 23(3), 85-88.
Rodríguez-Bravo, Blanca (2020). La consideración y utilización de las redes sociales académicas por los investigadores noveles españoles. Revista PH, 100, pp. 86-88. https://doi.org/10.33349/2020.100.4649
Rodríguez-Pomeda, Jesús; Sánchez-Fernández, Flor; Casani-Fernández Navarrete, Fernando (2023). El desarrollo de la ciencia abierta en el sistema universitario español. E.M., 75. http://hdl.handle.net/10486/711968
Rodríguez-Rodríguez, Rafael; Bernal-Martínez, Isabel (2024). Servicios para el cumplimiento de buenas prácticas de la ciencia abierta, DIGITAL.CSIC como palanca. Enredadera: revista de la Red de Bibliotecas y Archivos del CSIC, (41), 57-58. https://digital.csic.es/handle/10261/369997
Statista (2024). Global daily social media usage 2024. https://www.statista.com/statistics/433871/daily-social-media-usage-worldwide
Sugimoto, Cassidy R.; Work, Sam; Larivière, Vincent; Haustein, Stefanie (2017). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68: 2037-2062. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23833
Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A.; Santos-d'Amorim, Karen; Bornemann-Cimenti, Helmer (2025). The citation of retracted papers and impact on the integrity of the scientific biomedical literature. Learned Publishing, 38(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1667
Thelwall, Mike; Kousha, Kayvan (2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring scholarship?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), 66(5), 876-889. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23236
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Dimensions
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Francisco-Jesús Martínez-Galindo, Ángel M. Delgado-Vázquez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
