The Twitter accounts of scientific journals: a dataset

Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher

doi:10.1629/uksg.593

Abstract

Twitter harbours dense networks of academics, but to what extent do scientific journals use that platform? This article introduces a dataset of 3,485 Twitter accounts pertaining to a sample of 13,821 journals listed in Web of Science’s three major indices (SCIE, SSCI and AHCI). The summary statistics indicate that 25.2% of the journals have a dedicated Twitter presence. This number is likely to grow, as, on average, every one and a half days sees yet another journal setting up a new profile. The share of Twitter presence, however, varies strongly by publisher and discipline. The most active discipline is political science, which has almost 75% of its journals on Twitter, while other research categories have zero. The median account issues 116 messages a year and it interacts with distinct other users once in two to three Tweets. Approximately 600 journals refer to themselves as ‘peer-reviewed’, while 263 journals refer to their citation-based impact (like the impact factor) in their profile description. All in all, the data convey immense heterogeneity with respect to the Twitter behaviour of scientific journals. As there are numerous deceptive Twitter profile names established by predatory publishers, it is recommended that journals establish their official accounts lest bogus journals mislead the public about scientific findings. The dataset is available for use for further scientometric analyses.

References

Aravinthan Coomarasamy et al., “Medical Journals and Effective Dissemination of Health Research,” Health Information & Libraries Journal 18, no. 4 (2001): 183–91, DOI: 10.1046/j.1471-1842.2001.00349.x (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kyle M. Fargen et al., “Expanding the Social Media Presence of the Journal of Neurointerventional Surgery: Editor’s Report,” Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 9, no. 2 (1 February 2017): 215–18, DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012251 (accessed 15 November 2022); Kelly A. Cawcutt et al., “Use of a Coordinated Social Media Strategy to Improve Dissemination of Research and Collect Solutions Related to Workforce Gender Equity,” Journal of Women’s Health 28, no. 6 (2019): 849–62, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2018.7515 (accessed 15 November 2022); Cassidy R. Sugimoto et al., “Scholarly Use of Social Media and Altmetrics: A Review of the Literature,” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no. 9 (2017): 2037–62, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23833 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Judit Bar-Ilan, Gali Halevi, and Staša Milojević, “Differences between Altmetric Data Sources – A Case Study,” Journal of Altmetrics 2, no. 1 (2019): 1, DOI: 10.29024/joa.4 (accessed 15 November 2022); José-Luis Ortega, “Altmetrics data providers: A meta-analysis review of the coverage of metrics and publication,” El Profesional de la Información 29, no. 1 (2020), DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.07 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
John Ellis et al., “Recent Trends in the Use of Social Media in Parasitology and the Application of Alternative Metrics,” Current Research in Parasitology & Vector-Borne Diseases 1 (2021): 10, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crpvbd.2021.100013 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nicolás Robinson-García et al., “New Data, New Possibilities: Exploring the Insides of Altmetric.Com,” Profesional de La Información 23, no. 4 (2014): 359–366, DOI: 10.3145/epi.2014.jul.03 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Paul Studenic and Caroline Ospelt, “Do You Tweet?: Trailing the Connection between Altmetric and Research Impact!,” RMD Open 6, no. e001034 (2020): 2, DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2019-001034 (accessed 15 November 2022); Zhichao Fang and Rodrigo Costas, “Studying the Accumulation Velocity of Altmetric Data Tracked by Altmetric.Com,” Scientometrics 123 (2020): 1083, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03405-9 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zhichao Fang et al., “An Extensive Analysis of the Presence of Altmetric Data for Web of Science Publications across Subject Fields and Research Topics,” Scientometrics 124, no. 3 (2020): 2519–49, DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03564-9 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mike Thelwall, “Measuring Societal Impacts of Research with Altmetrics? Common Problems and Mistakes,” Journal of Economic Surveys 35, no. 5 (2021): 1302–14, DOI: 10.1111/joes.12381 (accessed 15 November 2022); Hyejin Park and Han Woo Park, “Research Evaluation of Asian Countries Using Altmetrics: Comparing South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and China,” Scientometrics 117, no. 2 (1 November 2018): 771–88, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2884-6 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Grischa Fraumann, “The Values and Limits of Altmetrics,” New Directions for Institutional Research 2018, no. 178 (2018): 56, DOI: 10.1002/ir.20267 (accessed 24 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fraumann, “The Values and Limits of Altmetrics,” 56.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
National Information Standards Organization, “NISO Altmetrics Standards Project White Paper,” (NISO, 2014), cited after Lutz Bornmann and Robin Haunschild, “To What Extent Does the Leiden Manifesto Also Apply to Altmetrics? A Discussion of the Manifesto against the Background of Research into Altmetrics,” Online Information Review 40, no. 4 (8 August 2016): 531, DOI: 10.1108/OIR-09-2015-0314 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cristina García-Villar, “A Critical Review on Altmetrics: Can We Measure the Social Impact Factor?,” Insights into Imaging 12, no. 1 (2021): 92, DOI: 10.1186/s13244-021-01033-2 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Varsha K. Khodiyar, Karen A. Rowlett, and Rebecca N. Lawrence, “Altmetrics as a Means of Assessing Scholarly Output,” Learned Publishing 27, no. 5 (2014): 31, DOI: 10.1087/20140505 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia et al., “The Unbearable Emptiness of Tweeting—About Journal Articles,” PLoS ONE 12, no. 8 (2017): e0183551, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183551 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Simon Wakeling et al., “Academic Communities: The Role of Journals and Open-Access Mega-Journals in Scholarly Communication,” Journal of Documentation 75, no. 1 (2018): 120–39, DOI: 10.1108/JD-05-2018-0067 (accessed 15 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Saeed-Ul Hassan et al., “Sentiment Analysis of Tweets through Altmetrics: A Machine Learning Approach,” Journal of Information Science 47, no. 6 (2021): 712–26, DOI: 10.1177/0165551520930917 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ritu Thamman et al., “Roles and Impact of Journal’s Social Media Editors,” Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 14, no. 11 (2021): e007443, DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.007443 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Winnie M Y Chen et al., “The Relationship between Citations, Downloads and Alternative Metrics in Rheumatology Publications: A Bibliometric Study,” Rheumatology 59, no. 2 (2020): 277–80, DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez163 (accessed 18 November 2022); Stefanie Haustein, Rodrigo Costas, and Vincent Larivière, “Characterizing Social Media Metrics of Scholarly Papers: The Effect of Document Properties and Collaboration Patterns,” PLOS ONE 10, no. 3 (2015): e0120495, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0120495 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A. Gorska et al., “The Role of Social Media in Scholarly Collaboration: An Enabler of International Research Team’s Activation?,” Journal of Global Information Technology Management 23, no. 4 (2020): 273–91, DOI: 10.1080/1097198X.2020.1817684 (accessed 18 November 2022); Qing Ke, Yong-Yeol Ahn, and Cassidy R. Sugimoto, “A Systematic Identification and Analysis of Scientists on Twitter,” PLOS ONE 12, no. 4 (2017): e0175368, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175368 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jafar Kolahi et al., “Analysis of Highly Tweeted Dental Journals and Articles: A Science Mapping Approach,” British Dental Journal 226 (2019): 673–78, DOI: 10.1038/s41415-019-0212-z (accessed 18 November 2022); Houqiang Yu et al., “Who Posts Scientific Tweets? An Investigation into the Productivity, Locations, and Identities of Scientific Tweeters,” Journal of Informetrics 13, no. 3 (1 August 2019): 841–55, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.08.001 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Maged N. Kamel Boulos and Patricia F. Anderson, “Preliminary Survey of Leading General Medicine Journals’ Use of Facebook and Twitter,” Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries 33, no. 2 (2012): 38–47, DOI: 10.5596/c2012-010 (accessed 18 November 2022); Theodore D. Cosco, “Medical Journals, Impact and Social Media: An Ecological Study of the Twittersphere,” Canadian Medical Association Journal 187, no. 18 (2015): 1353–57, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.150976 (accessed 18 November 2022); Brendan S. Kelly et al., “The Use of Twitter by Radiology Journals: An Analysis of Twitter Activity and Impact Factor,” Journal of the American College of Radiology 13, no. 11 (1 November 2016): 1391–96, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.06.041 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar et al., “Understanding the Twitter Usage of Humanities and Social Sciences Academic Journals,” Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology 55, no. 1 (2018): 430–39, DOI: 10.1002/pra2.2018.14505501047 (accessed 18 November 2022); Han Zheng et al., “Social Media Presence of Scholarly Journals,” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 70, no. 3 (2019): 256–70, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24124 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mark D. Wilkinson et al., “The FAIR Guiding Principles for Scientific Data Management and Stewardship,” Scientific Data 3, no. 1 (2016): 160018, DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Paul McNamara and Kim Usher, “Share or Perish: Social Media and the International Journal of Mental Health Nursing,” International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 28, no. 4 (2019): 960–70, DOI: 10.1111/inm.12600 (accessed 18 November 2022); R. Jay Widmer et al., “Effect of Promotion via Social Media on Access of Articles in an Academic Medical Journal: A Randomized Controlled Trial,” Academic Medicine 94, no. 10 (2019): 1546–53, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002811 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jose Luis Ortega, “The Presence of Academic Journals on Twitter and Its Relationship with Dissemination (Tweets) and Research Impact (Citations),” Aslib Journal of Information Management 69, no. 6 (2017): 674–87, DOI: 10.1108/AJIM-02-2017-0055 (accessed 18 November 2022); Austin Lee Chiang et al., “The Patterns and Impact of Social Media Exposure of Journal Publications in Gastroenterology: Retrospective Cohort Study,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 23, no. 5 (2021): e25252, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/25252 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
F. O’Kelly et al., “The Effect of Social Media (#SoMe) on Journal Impact Factor and Parental Awareness in Paediatric Urology,” Journal of Pediatric Urology 13, no. 5 (2017): 513.e1–513.e7, DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.03.027 (accessed 18 November 2022); Gregory J. Nason et al., “The Emerging Use of Twitter by Urological Journals,” BJU International 115, no. 3 (2015): 486–90, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12840 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Raamkumar et al., “Understanding the Twitter Usage of Humanities and Social Sciences Academic Journals.”
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
V. Wadhwa et al., “Maximizing the Tweet Engagement Rate in Academia: Analysis of the AJNR Twitter Feed,” American Journal of Neuroradiology 38, no. 10 (2017): 1866–68, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5283 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Matthew S. Robbins et al., “@HeadacheJournal Tweets On,” Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain 59, no. 6 (2019): 828–33, DOI: 10.1111/head.13539 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Natalie Erskine and Sharief Hendricks, “The Use of Twitter by Medical Journals: Systematic Review of the Literature,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 23, no. 7 (2021): e26378, DOI: 10.2196/26378 (accessed 18 November 2022); Aarti Sarwal et al., “Twitter Journal Club Impact on Engagement Metrics of the Neurocritical Care Journal,” Neurocritical Care 37 (2022): 129–39, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-022-01458-7 (accessed 18 November 2022); Douglas P. Lasch and Pamela C. Heaton, “Development of a Visual Abstract Template to Enhance Journal Article Circulation on Social Media,” Journal of the American Pharmacists Association 62, no. 1 (1 January 2022): 8–9, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japh.2021.11.026 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
ISO, “Rules for the Abbreviation of Title Words and Titles of Publications’ (International Organization for Standardization, 1997), DOI: https://www.iso.org/standard/3569.html (accessed 24 November 2022).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marina Bondi, “Dialogicity in Individual and Institutional Scientific Blogs,” Publications 10, no. 1 (2022): 9, DOI: 10.3390/publications10010009 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mansoor Iqbal, “Twitter Revenue and Usage Statistics (2022),” Business of Apps, 30 June 2022, https://www.businessofapps.com/data/twitter-statistics/ (accessed 18 November 2022).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kolahi et al., “Analysis of Highly Tweeted Dental Journals and Articles.”
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Yunxue Cui, Zhichao Fang, and Xianwen Wang, “Article Promotion on Twitter and Facebook: A Case Study of Cell Journal,” Journal of Information Science, 2021, 01655515211059772, DOI: 10.1177/01655515211059772 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mike Thelwall, “Altmetric Prevalence in the Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities: Where Are the Online Discussions?,” Journal of Altmetrics 1, no. 1, (28 November 2018): 3, DOI: 10.29024/joa.6 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Paul Capriotti and Laura Ruesja, “How CEOs Use Twitter: A Comparative Analysis of Global and Latin American Companies,” International Journal of Information Management 39 (2018): 244, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.01.003 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gillespie, “The Relevance of Algorithms.”
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Adam Coates, “Academic Journals’ Usernames and the Threat of Fraudulent Accounts on Social Media,” Learned Publishing 35, no. 2 (2022): 140–48, DOI: 10.1002/leap.1430 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stewart Manley, “Predatory Journals on Trial: Allegations, Responses, and Lessons for Scholarly Publishing from FTC v. OMICS,” Journal of Scholarly Publishing 50, no. 3 (April 2019): 183–200, DOI: 10.3138/jsp.50.3.02 (accessed 18 November 2022); Foad Nahai, “The Rise of Predatory Journals: What Difference Does It Make?,” Aesthetic Surgery Journal 35, no. 8 (2015): 1043, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjv085 (accessed 18 November 2022); Jason Roberts, “Predatory Journals: Illegitimate Publishing and Its Threat to All Readers and Authors,” The Journal of Sexual Medicine 13, no. 12 (1 December 2016): 1831, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.10.008 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hana Beckerle, Rachel Finston, and Benjamin Sussman, “Social Media Debate Position 1: Against the Use of Social Media as a Credible Source of Information,” Internet Reference Services Quarterly 25, no. 1–2 (2021): 25–35, DOI: 10.1080/10875301.2021.1937438 (accessed 18 November 2022); Sangho Lee and Jong Kim, “Early Filtering of Ephemeral Malicious Accounts on Twitter,” Computer Communications 54 (2014): 48–57, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2014.08.006 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Indraneil Paul et al., “Elites Tweet? Characterizing the Twitter Verified User Network,” in 2019 IEEE 35th International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW), 2019, 278–85, DOI: 10.1109/ICDEW.2019.00006 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cássio Cardoso Pereira, “Twitter: A Blue Badge for Scientists?,” Nature 605, no. 7908 (2022): 30, DOI: 10.1038/d41586-022-01188-y (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva and Panagiotis Tsigaris, “What Value Do Journal Whitelists and Blacklists Have in Academia?,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 44, no. 6 (1 November 2018): 781–92, DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.017 (accessed 18 November 2022); Michaela Strinzel et al., “Blacklists and Whitelists To Tackle Predatory Publishing: A Cross-Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis,” mBio 10, no. 3 (2019): e00411-19, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00411-19 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ludo Waltman, “Journal Observatory: Toward Systematic High-Quality Information on Scientific Journals,” 7, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6352978 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jason Potts et al., “A Journal Is a Club: A New Economic Model for Scholarly Publishing,” Prometheus 35, no. 1 (2017): 75–92, DOI: 10.1080/08109028.2017.1386949 (accessed 18 November 2022); John Hartley et al., “Do We Need to Move from Communication Technology to User Community? A New Economic Model of the Journal as a Club,” Learned Publishing 32, no. 1 (2019): 27–35, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1228 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alberto Baccini et al., “Intellectual and Social Similarity among Scholarly Journals: An Exploratory Comparison of the Networks of Editors, Authors and Co-Citations,” Quantitative Science Studies 1, no. 1 (2019): 277–89, DOI: 10.1162/qss_a_00006 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Serge Horbach, Wytske Hepkema, and Willem Halffman, “Hundreds of Journals’ Editorial Practices Captured in Database,” Nature 582, no. 7810 (2020): 32–32, DOI: 10.1038/d41586-020-01628-7 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Heather Morrison et al., “Open Access Article Processing Charges: DOAJ Survey May 2014,” Publications 3, no. 1 (2015): 1–16, DOI: 10.3390/publications3010001 (accessed 18 November 2022); Andreas Pacher, Tamara Heck, and Kerstin Schoch, “Open Editors: A Dataset of Scholarly Journals’ Editorial Board Positions,” SocArXiV, 2021, DOI: https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/jvzq7 (accessed 18 November 2022); Amanda Kay Montoya, William Leo Donald Krenzer, and Jessica Louise Fossum, “Opening the Door to Registered Reports: Census of Journals Publishing Registered Reports (2013–2020),” Collabra: Psychology 7, no. 1 (2021): 24404, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.24404 (accessed 18 November 2022); Dietmar Wolfram et al., “Open Peer Review: Promoting Transparency in Open Science,” Scientometrics 125, no. 2 (2020): 1033–51, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03488-4 (accessed 18 November 2022); Kyle Siler and Koen Frenken, “The Pricing of Open Access Journals: Diverse Niches and Sources of Value in Academic Publishing,” Quantitative Science Studies 1, no. 1 (1 February 2020): 28–59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00016 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher, “A Typology of Research Discovery Tools,” Journal of Information Science, 2021, 01655515211040654, DOI: 10.1177/01655515211040654 (accessed 18 November 2022).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

The Twitter accounts of scientific journals: a dataset

Abstract

Paradigm

My account