Are there biases in decisions to tweet on scientific papers? A plea for conducting an experimental Twitter study. Technical note
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.ene.15Palabras clave:
Altmetrics, Twitter, Experiments, Gender differences, Retweet preferences, Social media, Social networks, Scholarly communicationResumen
Twitter data are used as alternative metrics (altmetrics) to measure the impact or attention of research. Tweets are used to communicate about papers. However, Twitter data can only be used for research evaluation purposes, if biases do not influence tweet decisions on papers. The existence of biases can only be reasonably investigated using an experimental design with controlled (marginal) manipulations. In this comment, we propose to undertake an experimental approach to study the decision of scientists to "˜tweet´ on a paper. We describe the design of a study that might allow the experimental investigation of tweet decisions including randomized variations and theoretically derived mechanisms for explaining the empirical results. The described study design should be adaptable to other social media platforms (e.g., Facebook or ResearchGate). This comment is intended to be a plea for using an experimental design to investigate biases in tweet decisions. It is an advantage of tweets -in contrast to citations- that an experimental approach can be applied to investigate the decision of scientists to communicate on papers.
Descargas
Citas
Acock, Alan C. (2018). A gentle introduction to Stata (6th ed.). College Station, TX, USA: Stata Press. ISBN: 978 1 59718 269 0
Anderson, Melissa S. (2000). "Normative orientations of university faculty and doctoral students". Science and engineering ethics, v. 6, n. 4, pp. 443-461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-000-0002-6
Austin, Peter C. (2011). "An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies". Multivariate behavioral research, v. 46, n. 3, pp. 399-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
Berger, Peter L.; Luckmann, Thomas (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York, NY, USA: Doubleday. http://perflensburg.se/Berger%20social-construction-of-reality.pdf
Bornmann, Lutz; Mutz, Rí¼diger; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2011). "A reliability-generalization study of journal peer reviews: A multilevel meta-analysis of inter-rater reliability and its determinants". PLoS one, v. 5, n. 12, e14331. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014331
Cole, Jonathan R.; Singer, Burton (1991). "A theory of limited differences. Explaining the productivity puzzle in science". In: H. Zuckerman; J. R. Cole; J. T. Bruer (eds.). The outer circle. Women in the scientific community (pp. 277-310). London, UK: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN: 978 0 393027730
Cole, Stephen (1992). Making science. Between nature and society. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press. ISBN: 0 674 54347 5
Coleman, James S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA, USA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN: 0674312260
Colledge, Lisa (2014). Snowball metrics recipe book. Amsterdam: Snowball Metrics Program Partners. https://www.snowballmetrics.com/wp-content/uploads/0211-Snowball-Metrics-Recipe-Book-v7-LO.pdf
Dablander, Fabian (2020). An introduction to causal inference, 15 pp. https://psyarxiv.com/b3fkw
Didegah, Fereshteh; Thelwall, Mike (2013). "Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnoÂlogy". Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 64, n. 5, pp. 1055-1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22806
Falk, Armin; Heckman, James J. (2009). "Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences". Science, v. 326, n. 5952, pp. 535-538. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1168244
Fortunato, Santo; Bergstrom, Carl T.; Bí¶rner, Katy; Evans, James A.; Helbing, Dirk; Milojević, StaÅ¡a; Petersen, Alexander M.; Radicchi, Filippo; Sinatra, Robert; Uzzi, Brian; Vespignani, Alessandro; Waltman, Ludo; Wang, Dashun; Barabási, Albert-László (2018). "Science of science". Science, v. 359, n. 6379, eaao018. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185
Knobloch-Westerwick, Silvia; Glynn, Carroll J. (2013). "The Matilda effect - Role congruity effects on scholarly communication: A citation analysis of Communication research and Journal of communication articles". Communication research, 40, v. n. 1, pp. 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211418339
Lance, Peter M.; Guilkey, David K.; Hattori, Aiko; Angeles, Gustavo (2014). How do we know if a program made a diffeÂrence? A guide to statistical methods for program impact evaluation. Carolina: Measure Evaluation. ISBN: 978 0 692 23861 5 https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/ms-14-87-en/at_download/document
Larivière, Vincent; Gingras, Yves (2010). "The impact factor´s Matthew effect: A natural experiment in bibliometrics". Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 61, n. 2, pp. 424-427. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21232
Luhmann, Niklas (1992). Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp. ISBN: 978 3 518286012
Lynn, Freda B.; Noonan, Mary C.; Sauder, Michael; Andersson, Matthew A. (2019). "A rare case of gender parity in AcaÂdemia". Social forces, v. 98, n. 2, pp. 518-547. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy126
Mas-Bleda, Amalia; Thelwall, Mike (2016). "Can alternative indicators overcome language biases in citation counts? A comparison of Spanish and UK research". Scientometrics, v. 109, n. 3, pp. 2007-2030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2118-8
Merton, Robert K. (1942). "Science and technology in a democratic order". Journal of legal and political sociology, n. 1, pp. 115-126.
Merton, Robert K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 0 226 52091 9 https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5110/merton_sociology_science.pdf
Muchnik, Lev; Aral, Sinan; Taylor, Sean J. (2013). "Social influence bias: A randomized experiment". Science, v. 341, n. 6146, pp. 647-651. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240466
Mulkay, Michael (1979). Science and the sociology of knowledge. London, UK: George Allen and Unwin. ISBN: 978 0 043010938
Parker, Philip D.; Van-Zanden, Brooke; Marsh, Herbert W.; Owen, Katherine; Duineveld, Jasper J.; Noetel, Michael (2020). "The intersection of gender, social class, and cultural context: A meta-analysis". Educational psychology review, v. 32, n. 1, pp. 197-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09493-1
Salganik, Matthew J. (2017). Bit by bit: Social research in the digital age. Oxfordshire, UK: Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978 1 400888184
Salganik, Matthew J.; Dodds, Peter-Sheridan; Watts, Duncan J. (2006). "Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market". Science, v. 311, n. 5762, pp. 854-856. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1121066
Sheskin, David J. (2007). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (4th ed.). Boca Raton, FL, USA: Chapman & Hall/CRC. ISBN: 978 0 429186196 https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429186196
Small, Henry (2020). "Past as prologue: Approaches to the study of confirmation in science". Quantitative science studies, v. 1, n. 3, pp. 1025-1040. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00063
Strumia, Alessandro (2021). "Gender issues in fundamental physics: A bibliometric analysis". Quantitative science stuÂdies, v. 2, n. 1, pp. 225-253. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00114
Tahamtan, Iman; Bornmann, Lutz (2018). "Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature". Journal of informetrics, v. 12, n. 1, pp. 203-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.01.002
Tahamtan, Iman; Bornmann, Lutz (2019). "What do citation counts measure? An updated review of studies on citations in scientific documents published between 2006 and 2018". Scientometrics, v. 121, n. 3, pp. 1635-1684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03243-4
Tennant, Jonathan P.; Dugan, Jonathan M.; Graziotin, Daniel; Jacques, Damien C.; Waldner, Francois; Mietchen, Daniel; Elkhatib, Yehia; Collister, Lauren; Pikas, Christina K.;... Colomb, Julian (2018). "A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review [version 3; peer review: approved]". F1000Research. https://f1000research.com/articles/6-1151
Van-de-Rijt, Arnout; Kang, Soong-Moon; Restivo, Michael; Patil, Akshay (2014). "Field experiments of success-breeds-success dynamics". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, v. 111, n. 19, pp. 6934-6939. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1316836111
Van-Noorden, Richard (2014). "Scientists and the social network". Nature, v. 512, n. 7513, pp. 126-129. https://doi.org/10.1038/512126a
Wyatt, Sally; Milojevic, StaÅ¡a; Park, Han-Woo; Leydesdorff, Loet (2016). "The intellectual and practical contributions of scientometrics to STS". In: U. Felt; R. Fouché; C. A. Miller; L. Smith-Doerr (eds.). Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 87-112): The MIT Press. ISBN: 978 0 262035682 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2588336
Ziman, John (1996). "´Postacademic science´: Constructing knowledge with networks and norms". Science studies, v. 9, n. 1, pp. 67-80.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Condiciones de difusión de los artículos una vez son publicados
Los autores pueden publicitar libremente sus artículos en webs, redes sociales y repositorios
Deberán respetarse sin embargo, las siguientes condiciones:
- Solo deberá hacerse pública la versión editorial. Rogamos que no se publiquen preprints, postprints o pruebas de imprenta.
- Junto con esa copia ha de incluirse una mención específica de la publicación en la que ha aparecido el texto, añadiendo además un enlace clicable a la URL: http://revista.profesionaldelainformacion.com
La revista Profesional de la información ofrece los artículos en acceso abierto con una licencia Creative Commons BY.
