Social media has emerged as a powerful tool in the dynamic landscape of collaborative research and knowledge dissemination, facilitating meaningful interactions among researchers across the globe. These platforms facilitate scholars' transcending geographical boundaries, enabling them to engage seamlessly with their peers (González-Bailón and Lelkes, 2023; Howoldt et al., 2022). The significance of social media truly surfaced amid the physical distancing during the pandemic when it served as a core means of communication. However, with several limitations in the meantime, such as the dissemination of inaccurate information (Aïmeur et al., 2023), yet with favorable user attitudes towards its use for learning (Jogezai et al., 2021; Koroleva, 2016; Tran et al., 2023), enhanced self-efficacy (Alshahrani et al., 2018), improved understanding (Elliott et al., 2020), and deliberate decision-making (González-Bailón and Lelkes, 2023), Hargittai (2022) rightly considered the social media tools phenomenal in fostering resilience amid the pandemic. Despite its significance, we observe bans and restrictions on social media use in different countries across the globe. A prominent example is the "Great Firewall of China," which has resulted in the unavailability of platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. The social network Threads was recently banned in all European Union countries. In Ukraine, the social networks VKontakte and Odnoklassniki have been blocked. US government just banned TikTok. Another case is Russia, where social networks such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, and Twitter are either banned or not functioning. It can be posited that within tumultuous and depolarizing epochs, instances akin to the aforementioned are likely to proliferate. However, the question remains about how scientists adapt to these altered conditions. What strategies do they choose? Do communication channels atrophy, or like do neural connections they find alternative paths?

Unpacking and comprehending this situation can prove beneficial not only for the researchers themselves, situated on either side of the divide in countries with restricted social networks and those without prohibitions but with scholars eager to communicate across borders. Additionally, such insights may be advantageous for international network organizations capable of providing alternatives to globally recognized social platforms, serving as a communication platform by establishing their own local communities. Furthermore, this material holds value for stakeholders making analogous decisions or seeking tools for equilibrium.

The research proposed for discussion at the conference describes the Russian scenario, where social networks were systematically blocked or closed, constricting the communication window for researchers. It employs a combination of the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) framework to evaluate faculty perceptions of GAI usability (Bijker, W. E., & Pinch, T. J. (1984) and the Technological Acceptance Model (TAM) to illustrate how human behaviors influence the adoption and utilization of technology (Davis, 1989).  

This research underscores turbulence's role as a catalyst, prompting academics to redefine their approach to social media parameters and aiming for its impact on knowledge transmission and collaborative research endeavors.
Researchers must exhibit resilience by devising creative strategies and showcasing their innovativeness to advance research in an ever-changing world.

This qualitative phenomenological study (Neuman, 2014) explores researchers’ perceptions of social media bans and their responses in academic work (Mohammed & Adelakun, 2023). Conducted at a top 400 QS-ranked Russian university, known for its emphasis on economics and multidisciplinary research, the study recruited 10 participants through purposive sampling based on their willingness to participate and experience with social media in research. Participants represented diverse fields, including linguistics, psychology, history, and sociology, with experience ranging from 3 to 36 years (avg. 16.9 years). Data was collected via semi-structured Zoom interviews (25–30 minutes), conducted in English and Russian. Russian-language interviews were transcribed and translated to ensure accuracy (Khilji & Jogezai, 2024). Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2022) was used to identify patterns within responses. Researchers immersed in the data, coded responses based on two research questions: (1) participants’ interpretations of social media bans and (2) their adaptive strategies (Neuman, 2014). Codes were reviewed iteratively to ensure accuracy, with participant quotes used to illustrate key themes and enhance credibility.

This study provides key theoretical, research, and practical insights into the use of social media (SM) in restrictive environments. From a theoretical perspective, the findings emphasize adaptability and strategic platform use as crucial in overcoming constraints. By integrating SCOT and TAM frameworks, the study highlights how researchers navigate technological utility and sociocultural influences when facing restrictions. Future research should further explore the technosocial and sociocultural aspects of digital tools, using larger and more diverse samples for broader generalizability. For practical applications, the study underscores the importance of platform selection and responsible engagement in academic discourse. It also highlights researcher resilience and the need for SM platforms to foster trustworthy information sharing, professional networking, and research collaboration—especially in conflict settings. If platforms fail to support open academic exchange, they risk undermining their role in scholarly engagement.

Alshahrani, H., & Rasmussen Pennington D. (2018). Why not use it more? Sources of self-efficacy in researchers’ use of social media for knowledge sharing. Journal of Documentation, 74(6), 1274-1292. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-04-2018-0051 Bijker, W. E., & Pinch, T. J. (1984). The social construction of facts and artifacts: or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/030573588401400301 Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 Elliott, S. A., Dyson, M. P., Wilkes, G. V., Zimmermann, G. L., Chambers, C. T., Wittmeier, K. D., Russell, D. J., Scott, S. D., Thomson, D., & Hartling, L. (2020). Considerations for health researchers using social media for knowledge translation: Multiple case study. Journal of medical Internet research, 22(7), e15121. https://doi.org/10.2196/15121 González-Bailón, S., & Lelkes, Y. (2023). Do social media undermine social cohesion? A critical review. Social Issues and Policy Review, 17, 155-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12091 Hargittai, E. (2022). Connected in isolation: Digital privilege in unsettled times. MIT Press: Cambridge London. Howoldt, D., Kroll, H., Neuhäusler, P., & Feidenheimer, A. (2023). Understanding researchers’ Twitter uptake, activity and popularity—an analysis of applied research in Germany. Scientometrics, 128(1), 325-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04569-2 Koroleva, D. (2016). Using mobile technology and social media at home and at school by modern teenagers. Educational Studies Moscow, 1, 205-224. https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2016-1-205-224 Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. MIT Press. Tran, H. T. T., Nguyen, N. T., & Tang, T. T. (2023). Influences of subjective norms on teachers’ intention to use social media in working. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(1), ep400. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12659