Sometimes you have to just let go and release something to the wild. I have mentioned on a few occasions a qualitative study I did prior to the network study. To be honest, I think I actually did it in the Fall of 2007 ?! I thought (and was encouraged to believe) that I could get a journal article from it, but at this point, I've moved on. With the recent publication of another article on science blogs, I thought that this needed to be out there. Plus, it's really not fair to the participants who gave me their time.
After re-reading this just now, I don't think it's bad, but the title is horrible :) I've deposited it in e-lis (should show up here). For now, you can download the pdf from my University of Maryland pages.
How and Why Physicists and Chemists Use Blogs
This study examined how and why chemists and physicists blog. Two qualitative methods were used: content analysis of blog and "about" pages and in-depth responsive interviews with chemists and physicists who maintain blogs. Analysis of the data yielded several cross-cutting themes that provide a window into how physicists and chemists use their blogs and what value they receive from maintaining a blog and participating in a blogging community. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for supporting scientists' work.
Update 3/11/10: The research report has now been made available in E-LIS, a disciplinary repository. This is probably a longer lasting url than UM - which is notorious for deleting doc students immediately after they stop paying
This research talks about specifically about physicist and chemist bloggers, but I believe it encourage very scholar blogger self-conscious about what they are doing.
Nice research. I like the point you make about blogging as intermediate publishing tools of content that is too much or too little for formal journal publishing.