IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i3p21582440241271300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Science Under Debate: Disentangling the Interest on Twitter and Scholarly Research

Author

Listed:
  • Wei Yu
  • Junpeng Chen
  • Sanhong Deng

Abstract

Open science movement gains attention since it might enable a second scientific revolution that fundamentally changes research methods and standards across science. However, the discussion topics towards opens science both from the academia and the environments outside the scholarly communication process have not been formally identified. This paper contributes to that end by analyzing 145,716 open-science-related tweets and 3,200 research papers in Scopus from 2011 to 2022. The results show there is increasing interest about open science both on Twitter and from academia. There are similar foci for both the public on Twitter and the academia from Scopus, including cloud computing and COVID-19 pandemic. When the public on Twitter focus on open science events and citizen science, the scholarly research is more concerned about the detailed aspects and novel innovation in research. The findings might interest the policy-maker for offering evidence to facilitate open science policies and practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Wei Yu & Junpeng Chen & Sanhong Deng, 2024. "Open Science Under Debate: Disentangling the Interest on Twitter and Scholarly Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:3:p:21582440241271300
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241271300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241271300
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241271300?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodriguez-Pomeda, Jesus & Casani, Fernando & Serrano-López, Antonio Eleazar, 2023. "Reflections on the diffusion of management and organization research in the context of open science in Europe," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 664-672.
    2. Abu Bashar & Brighton Nyagadza & Neo Ligaraba & Eugine Tafadzwa Maziriri, 2023. "The influence of Covid-19 on consumer behaviour: a bibliometric review analysis and text mining," Arab Gulf Journal of Scientific Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 42(3), pages 585-601, May.
    3. Zhichao Fang & Rodrigo Costas & Paul Wouters, 2022. "User engagement with scholarly tweets of scientific papers: a large-scale and cross-disciplinary analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4523-4546, August.
    4. Veronika Cheplygina & Felienne Hermans & Casper Albers & Natalia Bielczyk & Ionica Smeets, 2020. "Ten simple rules for getting started on Twitter as a scientist," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-9, February.
    5. E Richard Gold, 2016. "Accelerating Translational Research through Open Science: The Neuro Experiment," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-6, December.
    6. Jan Luhmann & Manuel Burghardt, 2022. "Digital humanities—A discipline in its own right? An analysis of the role and position of digital humanities in the academic landscape," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(2), pages 148-171, February.
    7. Qianjin Zong & Zhihong Huang & Jiaru Huang, 2023. "Do open science badges work? Estimating the effects of open science badges on an article’s social media attention and research impacts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3627-3648, June.
    8. Nosek, BA & Alter, G & Banks, GC & Borsboom, D & Bowman, SD & Breckler, SJ & Buck, S & Chambers, CD & Chin, G & Christensen, G & Contestabile, M & Dafoe, A & Eich, E & Freese, J & Glennerster, R & Gor, 2015. "Promoting an open research culture," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7wh1000s, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    9. Sarpong, David & Ofosu, George & Botchie, David & Clear, Fintan, 2020. "Do-it-yourself (DiY) science: The proliferation, relevance and concerns," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    10. Michael Taylor, 2023. "Slow, slow, quick, quick, slow: five altmetric sources observed over a decade show evolving trends, by research age, attention source maturity and open access status," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2175-2200, April.
    11. Hajar Sotudeh & Zeinab Saber & Farzin Ghanbari Aloni & Mahdieh Mirzabeigi & Farshad Khunjush, 2022. "A longitudinal study of the evolution of opinions about open access and its main features: a twitter sentiment analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5587-5611, October.
    12. Coro, Gianpaolo, 2020. "A global-scale ecological niche model to predict SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection rate," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    13. Lin Zhang & Zhenyu Gou & Zhichao Fang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Ying Huang, 2023. "Who tweets scientific publications? A large‐scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(13), pages 1485-1497, December.
    14. Zhou, Qingqing & Zhang, Chengzhi, 2021. "Breaking community boundary: Comparing academic and social communication preferences regarding global pandemics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    15. J. Homolak & I. Kodvanj & D. Virag, 2020. "Preliminary analysis of COVID-19 academic information patterns: a call for open science in the times of closed borders," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2687-2701, September.
    16. Armel Lefebvre & Marco Spruit, 2023. "Laboratory Forensics for Open Science Readiness: an Investigative Approach to Research Data Management," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 381-399, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Josip Strcic & Antonia Civljak & Terezija Glozinic & Rafael Leite Pacheco & Tonci Brkovic & Livia Puljak, 2022. "Open data and data sharing in articles about COVID-19 published in preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2791-2802, May.
    2. Yu, Houqiang & Li, Longfei & Cao, Xueting & Chen, Tao, 2022. "Exploring country's preference over news mentions to academic papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    3. Constantin Bürgi & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2022. "The influence of Covid-19 on publications in economics: bibliometric evidence from five working paper series," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5175-5189, September.
    4. Guillaume Cabanac & Theodora Oikonomidi & Isabelle Boutron, 2021. "Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5285-5304, June.
    5. Hafiz Suliman Munawar & Hina Inam & Fahim Ullah & Siddra Qayyum & Abbas Z. Kouzani & M. A. Parvez Mahmud, 2021. "Towards Smart Healthcare: UAV-Based Optimized Path Planning for Delivering COVID-19 Self-Testing Kits Using Cutting Edge Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-21, September.
    6. Agnieszka Sompolska-Rzechuła & Agnieszka Kurdyś-Kujawska, 2021. "Towards Understanding Interactions between Sustainable Development Goals: The Role of Climate-Well-Being Linkages. Experiences of EU Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, April.
    7. Gold, E. Richard, 2021. "The fall of the innovation empire and its possible rise through open science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).
    8. Beltagui, Ahmad & Sesis, Achilleas & Stylos, Nikolaos, 2021. "A bricolage perspective on democratising innovation: The case of 3D printing in makerspaces," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    9. Wenceslao Arroyo‐Machado & Adrián A. Díaz‐Faes & Enrique Herrera‐Viedma & Rodrigo Costas, 2024. "From academic to media capital: To what extent does the scientific reputation of universities translate into Wikipedia attention?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(4), pages 423-437, April.
    10. Cameron Mura & Mike Chalupa & Abigail M Newbury & Jack Chalupa & Philip E Bourne, 2020. "Ten simple rules for starting research in your late teens," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-11, November.
    11. Haunschild, Robin & Bornmann, Lutz, 2023. "Which papers cited which tweets? An exploratory analysis based on Scopus data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    12. Ivan Kodvanj & Jan Homolak & Davor Virag & Vladimir Trkulja, 2022. "Publishing of COVID-19 preprints in peer-reviewed journals, preprinting trends, public discussion and quality issues," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1339-1352, March.
    13. Mallory C Kidwell & Ljiljana B Lazarević & Erica Baranski & Tom E Hardwicke & Sarah Piechowski & Lina-Sophia Falkenberg & Curtis Kennett & Agnieszka Slowik & Carina Sonnleitner & Chelsey Hess-Holden &, 2016. "Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-15, May.
    14. Leonardo B. Furstenau & Bruna Rabaioli & Michele Kremer Sott & Danielli Cossul & Mariluza Sott Bender & Eduardo Moreno Júdice De Mattos Farina & Fabiano Novaes Barcellos Filho & Priscilla Paola Severo, 2021. "A Bibliometric Network Analysis of Coronavirus during the First Eight Months of COVID-19 in 2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-24, January.
    15. E. Sachini & K. Sioumalas-Christodoulou & C. Chrysomallidis & G. Siganos & N. Bouras & N. Karampekios, 2021. "COVID-19 enabled co-authoring networks: a country-case analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5225-5244, June.
    16. Atiase, Victor Yawo & Kolade, Oluwaseun & Liedong, Tahiru Azaaviele, 2020. "The emergence and strategy of tech hubs in Africa: Implications for knowledge production and value creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Milad Haghani & Pegah Varamini, 2021. "Temporal evolution, most influential studies and sleeping beauties of the coronavirus literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 7005-7050, August.
    18. Zhao, Yi & Liu, Lifan & Zhang, Chengzhi, 2022. "Is coronavirus-related research becoming more interdisciplinary? A perspective of co-occurrence analysis and diversity measure of scientific articles," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    19. Diego Corrales-Garay & Eva-María Mora-Valentín & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, 2019. "Open Data for Open Innovation: An Analysis of Literature Characteristics," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, March.
    20. You, Weimu & Chen, Weifeng & Agyapong, Michael & Mordi, Chima, 2020. "The business model of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) laboratories – A triple-layered perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:3:p:21582440241271300. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.