7 research outputs found
What increases (social) media attention: Research impact, author prominence or title attractiveness?
Do only major scientific breakthroughs hit the news and social media, or does
a 'catchy' title help to attract public attention? How strong is the connection
between the importance of a scientific paper and the (social) media attention
it receives? In this study we investigate these questions by analysing the
relationship between the observed attention and certain characteristics of
scientific papers from two major multidisciplinary journals: Nature
Communication (NC) and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
We describe papers by features based on the linguistic properties of their
titles and centrality measures of their authors in their co-authorship network.
We identify linguistic features and collaboration patterns that might be
indicators for future attention, and are characteristic to different journals,
research disciplines, and media sources.Comment: Paper presented at 23rd International Conference on Science and
Technology Indicators (STI 2018) in Leiden, The Netherland
Collective Attention towards Scientists and Research Topics
Emergent patterns of collective attention towards scientists and their
research may function as a proxy for scientific impact which traditionally is
assessed via committees that award prizes to scientists. Therefore it is
crucial to understand the relationships between scientific impact and online
demand and supply for information about scientists and their work. In this
paper, we compare the temporal pattern of information supply (article
creations) and information demand (article views) on Wikipedia for two groups
of scientists: scientists who received one of the most prestigious awards in
their field and influential scientists from the same field who did not receive
an award. Our research highlights that awards function as external shocks which
increase supply and demand for information about scientists, but hardly affect
information supply and demand for their research topics. Further, we find
interesting differences in the temporal ordering of information supply between
the two groups: (i) award-winners have a higher probability that interest in
them precedes interest in their work; (ii) for award winners interest in
articles about them and their work is temporally more clustered than for
non-awarded scientists.Comment: Accepted at the 2018 ACM on Web Science Conference, Amsterdam,
Netherlands, May 27-30, 201
Collective Attention towards Scientists and Research Topics
Emergent patterns of collective attention towards scientists and their
research may function as a proxy for scientific impact which traditionally is
assessed via committees that award prizes to scientists. Therefore it is
crucial to understand the relationships between scientific impact and online
demand and supply for information about scientists and their work. In this
paper, we compare the temporal pattern of information supply (article
creations) and information demand (article views) on Wikipedia for two groups
of scientists: scientists who received one of the most prestigious awards in
their field and influential scientists from the same field who did not receive
an award. Our research highlights that awards function as external shocks which
increase supply and demand for information about scientists, but hardly affect
information supply and demand for their research topics. Further, we find
interesting differences in the temporal ordering of information supply between
the two groups: (i) award-winners have a higher probability that interest in
them precedes interest in their work; (ii) for award winners interest in
articles about them and their work is temporally more clustered than for
non-awarded scientists.Comment: Accepted at the 2018 ACM on Web Science Conference, Amsterdam,
Netherlands, May 27-30, 201
What increases (social) media attention: Research impact, author prominence or title attractiveness?
Do only major scientific breakthroughs hit the news and social media, or does a 'catchy' title help to attract public attention? How strong is the connection between the importance of a scientific paper and the (social) media attention it receives? In this study we investigate these questions by analysing the relationship between the observed attention and certain characteristics of scientific papers from two major multidisciplinary journals: Nature Communication (NC) and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). We describe papers by features based on the linguistic properties of their titles and centrality measures of their authors in their co-authorship network. We identify linguistic features and collaboration patterns that might be indicators for future attention, and are characteristic to different journals, research disciplines, and media sources