Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The article explores the functional capabilities of social academic networks as tools for the formation, dissemination, and reuse of scientific data in accordance with the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles. In the context of the development of open science, the digitalization of research activities and the growing role of scientific communication are making social academic networks important elements of the infrastructure of scientific exchange. The functional capabilities of ResearchGate, Academia.edu, and other digital services platforms for supporting open access, preserving scientific materials, managing academic profiles, forming a scientific identity, organizing scientific connections, and reusing research results are analyzed. The features of the implementation of the FAIR principles through mechanisms for indexing scientific content, using unique identifiers, metadata, open profiles, digital repositories, and integration with scientific analytics systems are identified. It has been established that social academic networks provide increased visibility of scientific results, promote interdisciplinary interaction of researchers, support data reuse, and enhance the openness of the scientific environment. At the same time, a number of limitations associated with the commercialization of individual platforms, copyright compliance issues, uneven data openness, and insufficient interoperability between services have been identified. The feasibility of comprehensive use of social academic networks in combination with institutional repositories, open scientific databases and international digital identifiers has been substantiated to ensure effective dissemination, accessibility and reuse of research results in accordance with the FAIR principles and modern requirements of open science. This approach contributes to increasing the visibility of scientific achievements, expanding academic communication, and forming an open digital research environment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Вознюк et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: