Investigating the quality of interactions and public engagement around scientific papers on Twitter. Issue 3 (August 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Didegah, Fereshteh; Mejlgaard, Niels; Sørensen, Mads P.
• Is Part Of: Journal of informetrics. Volume 12:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: 960
• Page End: 971
• Publication Date: 2018-08
• Subjects: Science communication -- Twitter -- Quality of interactions -- Public engagement; Library statistics -- Periodicals; Information science -- Statistical methods -- Periodicals; Bibliometrics -- Periodicals; Bibliothèques -- Statistiques -- Périodiques; Sciences de l'information -- Méthodes statistiques -- Périodiques; Bibliométrie -- Périodiques; 020.727
• DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2018.08.002
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1751-1577

Abstract

Highlights: Individual citizens and researchers play an important rol in the scientific communication process on Twitter. A general finding of this study is that bots and clone accounts play a major role in the landscape of science communication on Twitter. Twitter users very rarely add extra thoughts, ideas or questions to the original tweets. Abstract: This study explores science communication on Twitter by investigating a sample of tweets referring to academic papers in five different scientific fields. The specifications of science communicators on Twitter, the characteristics of those who initiate actions (by tweeting), the extent and quality of reactions (retweeting), individual and group interactions, and the distribution of tweets across types of engagement in the process of science communication (i.e., dissemination, consultation, and evaluation) were explored. A broad array of actors is involved in the communication of science on Twitter, with individual citizens and individual researchers playing an important role. In principle, this is promising for creating direct interaction, which can be difficult through more traditional mass media. The vast majority of communication activities regarding academic papers is undigested dissemination with almost no sign of debate, contestation, or collective reflection. Another general finding of this study is that bot accounts play a major role in the science communication landscape on Twitter.