How scientific information on the internet has changed
Since the early 2000s, the way people use the internet has changed dramatically. An increasing number of individuals have begun not only to seek information online but also to actively contribute their opinions to online discussions.
One characteristic of this communication model is that it tends to connect people with similar beliefs and viewpoints, creating networks that, while capable of spreading new ideas and content extremely quickly and widely, are often resistant to new perspectives. As a result, these networks can also facilitate the dissemination of false or unverified information.
One example of a scientific debate that has gained considerable attention on social media in recent years concerns vaccination. Even in the absence of new scientific evidence, online discussions have led to large-scale shifts in public opinion regarding the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, with important public health consequences, including lower vaccination rates, new outbreaks, and the re-emergence of previously controlled diseases.
The impact of scientific publications on pro- and anti-vaccination tweets
A study published in Health Promotion Practice reported the results of research conducted at Texas A&M University that examined how scientific publications influence online public discussions (particularly on Twitter) and which factors can affect users’ behavior and opinions on social media.
The researchers collected, coded, and analyzed approximately 3,000 vaccine-related posts published on Twitter over a two-week period in 2014, during which two scientific studies on vaccines were published.
Following the publication of the two scientific articles, the number of vaccine-related tweets increased by 21%. Of these posts, 60.5% were pro-vaccination, 13% were anti-vaccination, and 26.5% were neutral.
According to the analysis, the publication of the two scientific studies was associated with a 25% decrease in anti-vaccination tweets and a 16.6% increase in pro-vaccination tweets. In addition, user behavior changed, with an increase in likes and retweets for posts supporting vaccination.
Regression analysis also showed that user engagement (likes and retweets) was primarily influenced by whether posts originated from verified sources and by the number of followers the author had.
How to continue influencing social media
The results of this analysis suggest that scientific publications can influence not only the type of information shared online but also the way users interact with each other and with social media platforms.
Considering how easily false or unverified information can spread globally through the internet, it is essential to continue producing scientific publications on public health topics that are widely discussed online. Even when publications simply confirm findings that are already established and accepted within the scientific community, they help distribute verified information to the much larger audience that will never directly read the original research article.
Another valuable step is to build a network of collaboration between researchers and influencers to communicate scientific information in ways that are both effective and easy to understand.
In this regard, it is important to publish content that captures users’ attention and encourages sharing and interaction. The use of images, for example, has enormous influence, increasing the likelihood that a post will be clicked by 18%, receive likes by 89%, and be retweeted by 150%.
SOURCE
Nelon JL, Moscarelli M, Stupka P, Sumners C, Uselton T, Patterson MS. Does Scientific Publication Inform Public Discourse? A Case Study Observing Social Media Engagement Around Vaccinations. Health Promot Pract. 2020 Feb 1:1524839919899925. doi: 10.1177/1524839919899925. [Epub ahead of print]