Who, what, why? An exploration of JoVE scientific video publications in tweets

Xu, Shenmeng; Yu, Houqiang; Hemminger, Bradley M.; Dong, Xie

doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2880-x

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding the sentiment of tweet texts, scholarly tweets were found to be generally neutral, with limited share showing positive or negative sentiment expressed by users (Friedrich et al, 2015;Thelwall et al, 2013). Besides, the use of some tweet features in scholarly tweets, such as hashtags (word or phrase prefixed with #) and user mentions (user's handle name prefixed with @), was also of interest by some altmetric research (Haustein et al, 2014a;Xu et al, 2018), because it represents a particular form of user interactions enhancing the description and visibility of tweets and facilitating connections amongst users (Haustein, 2019;.…”

Section: Scholarly Tweets As the Objects Of Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

User engagement with scholarly tweets of scientific papers: a large-scale and cross-disciplinary analysis

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the extent to which scholarly tweets of scientific papers are engaged with by Twitter users through four types of user engagement behaviors, i.e., liking, retweeting, quoting, and replying. Based on a sample consisting of 7 million scholarly tweets of Web of Science papers, our results show that likes is the most prevalent engagement metric, covering 44% of scholarly tweets, followed by retweets (36%), whereas quotes and replies are only present for 9% and 7% of all scholarly tweets, respectively. From a disciplinary point of view, scholarly tweets in the field of Social Sciences and Humanities are more likely to trigger user engagement over other subject fields. The presence of user engagement is more associated with other Twitter-based factors (e.g., number of mentioned users in tweets and number of followers of users) than with science-based factors (e.g., citations and Mendeley readers of tweeted papers). Building on these findings, this study sheds light on the possibility to apply user engagement metrics in measuring deeper levels of Twitter reception of scholarly information.

show abstract

Section: Scholarly Tweets As the Objects Of Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

User engagement with scholarly tweets of scientific papers: a large-scale and cross-disciplinary analysis

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Online videos are a new method of academic communication (Xu et al 2018). Thelwall et al (2012) performed a content analysis of YouTube videos tweeted by academics.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of video abstract on citation counts: evidence from a retrospective cohort study of New Journal of Physics

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we addressed the question of whether a video abstract of an article affects its citation counts. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the research articles published in New Journal of Physics during 2010 and 2016. Articles with video abstract (N = 315) as the experimental group, were matched 1:2, with articles without video abstract (N = 630) as the control group, by the same publishing issue, same article type. Specifically, the articles lacking video abstract that appeared immediately before and after each experimental group article were included in the control group. A negative binomial regression model was employed to analyze the data. After controlling for the characteristics of articles (including the number of authors, international co-authorship, character counts of title, character counts of text-based abstract, keyword counts, reference counts, page counts and funding), our results showed that articles with video abstract (experimental group) compared to the articles without video abstract (control group) were expected to have a rate 1.206 times greater for citation counts. This study suggests that a video abstract can potentially serve as a useful genre of a research article for receiving more citation counts.

show abstract

“…For instance, the "cat" may frequently co-occur with "laboratory," which indicates the "cat" is the research object of researchers, not similar literal meaning between the two terms. 3 A considerable number of tweets of scientific publications are posted by Twitter bots, which challenges the use of raw tweet counts a performance indicator (Haustein et al, 2016;Robinson-Garcia et al, 2017;Xu, 2018). However, as will be shown in the following, our analysis still yields interesting information about external tweeting audiences and their behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…3 3 A considerable number of tweets of scientific publications are posted by Twitter bots, which challenges the use of raw tweet counts a performance indicator (Haustein et al, 2016; Robinson‐Garcia et al, 2017; Xu, 2018). However, as will be shown in the following, our analysis still yields interesting information about external tweeting audiences and their behavior. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who tweets scientific publications? A large‐scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research

Zhang,

Gou,

Fang

et al. 2023

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of tweets about scientific publications as an indicator of societal impact by measuring the degree to which the publications are tweeted beyond academia. We introduce methods that allow for using a much larger and broader data set than in previous validation studies. It covers all areas of research and includes almost 40 million tweets by 2.5 million unique tweeters mentioning almost 4 million scientific publications. We find that, although half of the tweeters are external to academia, most of the tweets are from within academia, and most of the external tweets are responses to original tweets within academia. Only half of the tweeted publications are tweeted outside of academia. We conclude that, in general, the tweeting of scientific publications is not a valid indicator of the societal impact of research. However, publications that continue being tweeted after a few days represent recent scientific achievements that catch attention in society. These publications occur more often in the health sciences and in the social sciences and humanities.

show abstract

Who, what, why? An exploration of JoVE scientific video publications in tweets

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

User engagement with scholarly tweets of scientific papers: a large-scale and cross-disciplinary analysis

User engagement with scholarly tweets of scientific papers: a large-scale and cross-disciplinary analysis

The impact of video abstract on citation counts: evidence from a retrospective cohort study of New Journal of Physics

Who tweets scientific publications? A large‐scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About