Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun 3;17(6):e0268999.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268999. eCollection 2022.

Who tweets climate change papers? investigating publics of research through users' descriptions

Affiliations

Who tweets climate change papers? investigating publics of research through users' descriptions

Rémi Toupin et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

As social issues like climate change become increasingly salient, digital traces left by scholarly documents can be used to assess their reach outside of academia. Our research examine who shared climate change research papers on Twitter by looking at the expressions used in profile descriptions. We categorized users in eight categories (academia, communication, political, professional, personal, organization, bots and publishers) associated to specific expressions. Results indicate how diverse publics may be represented in the communication of scholarly documents on Twitter. Supplementing our word detection analysis with qualitative assessments of the results, we highlight how the presence of unique or multiple categorizations in textual Twitter descriptions provides evidence of the publics of research in specific contexts. Our results show a more substantial communication by academics and organizations for papers published in 2016, whereas the general public comparatively participated more in 2015. Overall, there is significant participation of publics outside of academia in the communication of climate change research articles on Twitter, although the extent to which these publics participate varies between individual papers. This means that papers circulate in specific communities which need to be assessed to understand the reach of research on social media. Furthermore, the flexibility of our method provide means for research assessment that consider the contextuality and plurality of publics involved on Twitter.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Distribution of climate change research tweeted papers in scientific journals.
Depicted in the above histogram are the ten journals that published the most tweeted papers in our dataset, and below are the ten journals that published the most papers tweeted by more than 100 users.

References

    1. Haustein S. Scholarly Twitter Metrics. In Glänzel W, Moed HF, Schmoch U, Thelwall M, editors. Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators. Springer; 2019. pp. 729–760.
    1. Priem J, Taraborelli D, Groth P, Neylon C. Altmetrics: a manifesto. 2010. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/
    1. Sugimoto CR, Work S, Larivière V, Haustein S. Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2017;68: 2037–2062. doi: 10.1002/asi.23833 - DOI
    1. Díaz-Faes AA, Bowman TD, Costas R. Towards a second generation of ‘social media metrics’: Characterizing Twitter communities of attention around science. PLOS ONE. 2019;14: e0216408. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216408 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Araujo RF. Communities of attention networks: introducing qualitative and conversational perspectives for altmetrics. Scientometrics. 2020;124: 1793–1809. doi: 10.1007/s11192-020-03566-7 - DOI

Publication types