论文标题

在线参与缩回文章:谁,何时以及如何?

Online Engagement with Retracted Articles: Who, When, and How?

论文作者

Dambanemuya, Henry K., Abhari, Rod, Vincent, Nicholas, Horvát, Emőke-Ágnes

论文摘要

在社交媒体上讨论的撤回研究可能会传播错误信息。然而,我们对学术和非学术使用者如何提及如何提及缩回文章的理解。由于平台在科学传播中的重要作用,这在Twitter上尤其重要。在这里,我们分析了Twitter的关注和参与度指标的重新撤离差异,其中3,800多种缩回的英语文章以及可比的非逆向文章。我们根据受到监督学习分类器检测到的五种用户类型来将这些发现征收:公众,学者,机器人,科学从业人员和科学沟通者。我们发现,缩回的文章比非撤回的文章,尤其是在公众和机器人中,大多数用户参与发生在撤退前,都会受到更多的用户关注(推文计数)和参与度(喜欢,转发和答复)。我们的结果突出了非专家在讨论缩回研究的讨论中的重要作用,并提出了一个社交媒体平台的机会,有助于在线发现有问题的科学研究。

Retracted research discussed on social media can spread misinformation. Yet we lack an understanding of how retracted articles are mentioned by academic and non-academic users. This is especially relevant on Twitter due to the platform's prominent role in science communication. Here, we analyze the pre- and post-retraction differences in Twitter attention and engagement metrics for over 3,800 retracted English-language articles alongside comparable non-retracted articles. We subset these findings according to five user types detected by our supervised learning classifier: members of the public, academics, bots, science practitioners, and science communicators. We find that retracted articles receive greater user attention (tweet count) and engagement (likes, retweets, and replies) than non-retracted articles, especially among members of the public and bots, with the majority of user engagement happening before retraction. Our results highlight the prominent role of non-experts in discussions of retracted research and suggest an opportunity for social media platforms to contribute towards early detection of problematic scientific research online.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源