A High-Scale Assessment of Social Media and Mainstream Media in Scientific Communication

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.08430v1
• Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:58:33 GMT
• Title: A High-Scale Assessment of Social Media and Mainstream Media in Scientific Communication
• Authors: Yang Yang, Tanya Tian, Brian Uzzi, Benjamin Jones,
• Abstract summary: We compare research coverage in social media and mainstream media in a broad corpus of scientific work.<n>We find that social media significantly alters what science is, and is not, covered.<n>Despite concerns about the quality of science represented in social media, we find that social media typically covers scientific works that are impactful and novel within science.
• Score: 3.0638121959294264
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Communication of scientific knowledge beyond the walls of science is key to science's societal impact. Media channels play sizable roles in disseminating new scientific ideas about human health, economic welfare, and government policy as well as responses to emergent challenges such as climate change. Indeed, effectively communicating science to the public helps inform society's decisions on scientific and technological policies, the value of science, and investment in research. At the same time, the rise of social media has greatly changed communication systems, which may substantially affect the public's interface with science. Examining 20.9 million scientific publications, we compare research coverage in social media and mainstream media in a broad corpus of scientific work. We find substantial shifts in the scale, impact, and heterogeneity of scientific coverage. First, social media significantly alters what science is, and is not, covered. Whereas mainstream media accentuates eminence in the coverage of science and focuses on specific fields, social media more evenly sample research according to field, institutional rank, journal, and demography, increasing the scale of scientific ideas covered relative to mainstream outlets more than eightfold. Second, despite concerns about the quality of science represented in social media, we find that social media typically covers scientific works that are impactful and novel within science. Third, scientists on social media, as experts in their domains, tend to surface high-impact research in their own fields while sampling widely across research institutions. Contrary to prevalent observations about social media, these findings reveal that social media expands and diversifies science reporting by highlighting high-impact research and bringing a broader array of scholars, institutions and scientific concepts into public view.

Related papers

• OmniScientist: Toward a Co-evolving Ecosystem of Human and AI Scientists [47.41269933143946]
  We introduce OmniScientist, a framework that encodes the underlying mechanisms of human research into the AI scientific workflow.<n> OmniScientist achieves end-to-end automation across data foundation, literature review, research ideation, experiment automation, scientific writing, and peer review.<n>This infrastructure empowers agents to not only comprehend and leverage human knowledge systems but also to collaborate and co-evolve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-21T03:55:19Z)
• Modeling Public Perceptions of Science in Media [49.096529873255385]
  We introduce a computational framework that models public perception across twelve dimensions, such as newsworthiness, importance, and surprisingness.<n>We create a large-scale science news perception dataset with 10,489 annotations from 2,101 participants from diverse US and UK populations.<n>We develop NLP models that predict public perception scores with a strong performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-19T21:49:28Z)
• Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation [58.064940977804596]
  A plethora of new AI models and tools has been proposed, promising to empower researchers and academics worldwide to conduct their research more effectively and efficiently.<n>Ethical concerns regarding shortcomings of these tools and potential for misuse take a particularly prominent place in our discussion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:26:45Z)
• Cultural Differences and Perverse Incentives in Science Create a Bad Mix: Exploring Country-Level Publication Bias in Select ACM Conferences [0.0789257770465417]
  In the era of big science, many national governments are helping to build well-funded teams of scientists to serve nationalistic ambitions.<n>We provide evidence that indicates significant inequality using standard Gini Index metrics in the publication rates of individual scientists.<n>Scientists who were affiliated with the top-5 countries were found to be contributing significantly more to the inequality in publication rates than others.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-28T18:52:59Z)
• Decoding Digital Influence: The Role of Social Media Behavior in Scientific Stratification Through Logistic Attribution Method [6.285608271780605]
  This study comprehensively analyzes the impact of social media on scientific stratification and mobility. It uses an Explainable Logistic Analysis from a meso-level perspective to explore the correlation between social media behaviors and scientific social stratification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T02:01:40Z)
• Understanding Fine-grained Distortions in Reports of Scientific Findings [46.96512578511154]
  Distorted science communication harms individuals and society as it can lead to unhealthy behavior change and decrease trust in scientific institutions. Given the rapidly increasing volume of science communication in recent years, a fine-grained understanding of how findings from scientific publications are reported to the general public is crucial.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T19:00:01Z)
• Position: AI/ML Influencers Have a Place in the Academic Process [82.2069685579588]
  We investigate the role of social media influencers in enhancing the visibility of machine learning research. We have compiled a comprehensive dataset of over 8,000 papers, spanning tweets from December 2018 to October 2023. Our statistical and causal inference analysis reveals a significant increase in citations for papers endorsed by these influencers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T20:05:49Z)
• Combating Health Misinformation in Social Media: Characterization, Detection, Intervention, and Open Issues [24.428582199602822]
  The rise of various social media platforms also enables the proliferation of online misinformation. Health misinformation in social media has become an emerging research direction that attracts increasing attention from researchers of different disciplines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-10T01:52:12Z)
• Modeling Information Change in Science Communication with Semantically Matched Paraphrases [50.67030449927206]
  SPICED is the first paraphrase dataset of scientific findings annotated for degree of information change. SPICED contains 6,000 scientific finding pairs extracted from news stories, social media discussions, and full texts of original papers. Models trained on SPICED improve downstream performance on evidence retrieval for fact checking of real-world scientific claims.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T07:44:38Z)
• A Computational Inflection for Scientific Discovery [48.176406062568674]
  We stand at the foot of a significant inflection in the trajectory of scientific discovery. As society continues on its fast-paced digital transformation, so does humankind's collective scientific knowledge. Computer science is poised to ignite a revolution in the scientific process itself.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-04T11:36:54Z)
• Research on Domain Information Mining and Theme Evolution of Scientific Papers [5.747583451398117]
  Cross-disciplinary research results have gradually become an emerging frontier research direction. How to effectively use the huge number of scientific papers to help researchers becomes a challenge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-18T14:36:17Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.