Does really no one care? Analyzing the public engagement of communication scientists on Twitter

Abstract

Recent publications question the public visibility of communication science as a discipline and its relevance for the broader society. To address this issue, we analyze the public engagement of communication scientists by using the example of their Twitter activity. We theoretically distinguish eight types of engagement and explore their empirical prevalence. The results show that a large share of communication is between peers, fulfilling social networking functions. Nevertheless, more than a quarter of the tweets are on political and social topics. In this way, communication scientists bring society into their scholarly community and thus act as bridge builders. They also reach diverse publics outside of science, such as followers from the field of economics. Our study thus highlights the diversity of connections between science and society and can offer a starting point to further research other fields of public engagement and the impact of the discipline on the public discourse.

Wissenschaftskommunikation zwischen Gesellschafts‑, Wissenschafts- und Medienwandel

“…z. B. Jünger und Fähnrich 2019 ; Neuberger 2014 ). Dem vorliegenden Themenheft liegt ein solch breites Verständnis von Wissenschaftskommunikation zugrunde.…”

“…Nielsen ( 2018 ) behauptet für die Politische Kommunikationsforschung gar „no one cares what we know“ und begründet die geringe Sichtbarkeit des Fachs auch mit der Selbstbezüglichkeit seiner Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler – eine These, die sich empirisch zumindest teilweise widerlegen lässt (vgl. Jünger und Fähnrich 2019 ). Entsprechend lohnt zukünftige systematische Forschung zur Wissenschaftskommunikation der Kommunikationswissenschaft, weil sie zeigen könnte, mit welchen Themen das Fach in die Gesellschaft tritt, als wie wichtig es von außen wahrgenommen wird, wie sich diese Faktoren im Zeitverlauf verändern, wie das Fach im Vergleich zu anderen Disziplinen steht und gegebenenfalls auch, welche Implikationen dies für die Interaktion von Kommunikationswissenschaft, Politik und Gesellschaft selbst hat.…”

Digital Colleague Connectedness: A Framework for Studying Teachers’ Professional Network Interactions

“…When applying Kozinets's (2020) consociality to virtual network interactions of DCs, it is important to describe the behaviors of the professional interactions. In a sociology study of scientists on Twitter, researchers took an innovative approach and, in addition to examining the topics of engagement, they examined the directions and modes of engagement (Junger & Fähnrich, 2019). Some of the modes of engagement behaviors included reporting, commenting, reputational, participatory, activating, and inspirational, but researchers found it was important to pay attention to whether the scientist referenced others, referenced self, or added mentions in the posts.…”

“…DCs promote when they post a reference or include URLs to additional information about products, services, or events. Promote behaviors include reputational posts that describe projects, publications, and professional achievements (Junger & Fähnrich, 2019). Posts that promote are meant to reach a large number of DCs.…”

“…Posts with content published to "inform or inspire" the DC network can be in the form of new content created by a DC for the network, or it can be shared or linked content. Tess (2013) described these creative acts as content created or remixed to share, while inspirational posts encourage the PN (Junger & Fähnrich, 2019). Inspire or affirmation include giving or receiving approval, praise, and encouragement (Cranefield et al, 2015) Engage The behavior of "engage" refers to sharing, forwarding, or commenting on professional ideas of others, all eliciting responses and stimulating professional dialogue.…”