Scholarly Research on Educational Adaptation of Social Media: Is There Evidence of Publication Bias?
Abstract The sizeable majority of research findings on educational adaptation of social media (SM) is based on college student samples. A cursory review of the extant literature on the educational use of SM appears to convey an uncritical spirit regarding adaptations of modern Web 2.0 technology. This article examines the issue of whether publication bias is a factor in this emerging research domain. To that end, a keyword search in the database ProQuest, which limited the output for the term social media/ educational in the abstract, produced 452 scholarly journal references. A subset of these studies (n=40), with a focus on empirical outcome, on the efficacy of SM in educational settings was examined. A second search identified studies (n= 104) that reported 'limitations' to the instructional use of SM. Findings indicated that about 25% of these studies using college student samples and about 50% on faculty respondents report contrary findings, negative results, expressed concerns, and limitations to SM use in higher education. However, in nearly all studies, such results were reported as secondary or tertiary findings; few studies presented contrary results or student/faculty concerns about educational adaptation of Web 2.0 technology as the primary research finding. Based on this analysis, there appears to be little evidence for publication bias in this research domain; however, educators need to be vigilant and maintain a critical perspective on both investigatory design and research findings regarding this highly salient academic topic. Vigorous debate and contrarian views on instructional applications of Web 2.0 technologies should be encouraged. Introduction The impetus for the integration of Web 2.0 communicative technologies in education has been predominantly robust and without criticism (Hung & Yuen, 2010), although this enthusiasm has recently been challenged (Bartow, 2014; Selwyn, 2010; Veletsianos et al., 2013). In fact, some studies do acknowledge that both college students and faculty express ambivalent views and other concerns regarding the use of social media (SM) as an instructional tool (e.g., Pikalek, 2010). However, a cursory review of the extant literature on SM use for pedagogic purposes seems to leave the observer with the impression that researchers emphasize, and even tout, the positive aspects of emerging Web 2.0 interactive technology; and tend to ignore or downplay potential drawbacks or limitations regarding instructional use of SM in higher education. Thus, a systematic examination of this important contemporary issue seems in order. The Issue of Publication Bias Maintaining scientific credibility has always been at the forefront of the research enterprise. Publication bias, a thorny concern in scholarly research, refers to the tendency for published research studies to be predominantly skewed to reporting statistically positive results or confirmatory findings; i.e., research papers that report negative results or inconclusive findings tend to either a) not be submitted for publication, or b) rejected by editorial/peer review. Thus, publication bias negatively impacts the consumer or evaluator of research when a fair, systematic review of a specific research topic or domain is desired. To the unsuspecting reader, contrary or non-corroborative research findings are considered non-existent if these conclusions are not part of the published, scholarly record. The field of education has recognized the potential onerous effects of publication bias and several authors have offered methods to confront the problem (Banks et al., 2012; Torgerson, 2006). The Current Study The current study, in an exploratory approach, addresses the potential for a type of publication bias in research on the specific topic of educational adaptations of social media. The research question is: Are contrary or negative findings, including critiques, on the issue of social media use in education underrepresented in the population of published studies in the literature? …