Search bioRxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2023.04.23.537950

Twitter and Mastodon presence of highly-cited scientists

Siebert, M.·Siena, L. M.·Ioannidis, J. P. A.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Social media platforms have an increasing influence in biomedical and other disciplines of science and public health. While Twitter has been a popular platform for scientific communication, changes in ownership have led some users to consider migrating to other platforms such as Mastodon. We aimed to investigate how many top-cited scientists are active on these social media platforms, the magnitude of the migration to Mastodon, and correlates of Twitter presence. A random sample of 900 authors was examined among those who are at the top-2% of impact based on a previously validated composite citation indicator using Scopus data. Searches for their personal Twitter accounts were performed in early December 2022, and re-evaluations were performed at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 2 months (February 6, 2023). 262/900 (29.1%) of highly-cited scholars had Twitter accounts, and only 9/800 (1%) had Mastodon accounts. Female gender, North American and Australia locations, younger publication age, and clinical medicine or social science expertise correlated with higher percentages of Twitter use. The vast majority of highly-cited author users of Twitter had few followers and tweets. Only 6 had more than 10,000 followers and none had more than 100,000. One limitation of our study is that it is possible that some accounts, especially with Mastodon, could not be detected. However, the study suggests that Twitter remains the preferred social media platform for highly-cited authors, and Mastodon has not yet challenged Twitters dominance. Moreover, most highly-cited scientists with Twitter accounts have limited presence in this medium.

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Siebert, M., Siena, L. M., Ioannidis, J. P. A.. 2023-04-24. Twitter and Mastodon presence of highly-cited scientists. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.23.537950

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2024

SIMHYB 2: a software tool to explore and illustrate evolutionary forces in Population Genetics teaching and research. Application to Conservation Genetics

Practical approaches have become a standard in many scientific disciplines, including population genetics. By analyzing properly selected datasets, the students can calculate parameters and draw conclusions about genetic diversity, differentiation and evolution of populations with higher efficiency than if based exclusively on theoretical lessons. However, preparing the appropriate datasets is a hard task and a wrong selection can spoil a well-aimed practice. Here we present SO_SCPLOWIMC_SCPLOWHO_SCPLOWYBC_SCPLOW 2, a software tool specifically intended to ease the full understanding of evolutionary forces by the students and to help the teacher to prepare adequate datasets and examples for the practices. It simulates the course of a mixed population under user-defined reproductive and evolutionary conditions. Outputs can be easily adapted for downstream analysis with other popular tools as GO_SCPLOWENC_SCPLOWAO_SCPLOWLC_SCPLOWEO_SCPLOWXC_SCPLOW or SO_SCPLOWTRUCTUREC_SCPLOW. Thus, SO_SCPLOWIMC_SCPLOWHO_SCPLOWYBC_SCPLOW 2 is very suitable for project-based-learning approaches: students can produce their own datasets in different scenarios of genetic drift, migration, selective advantage, reproductive success... Additionally, SO_SCPLOWIMC_SCPLOWHO_SCPLOWYBC_SCPLOW 2 is the only simulation software available to date providing traceable pedigrees of individuals, being therefore very convenient for preparing datasets for parentage analysis, spatial genetic structure or conservation genetics study cases. Satisfactory results from its ongoing utilization in higher education and research are reported.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2024

Postdoctoral Scholar Recruitment and Hiring Practices in STEM: A Pilot Study

Despite the importance of the postdoctoral position in the training of scientists for independent research careers, few studies have addressed recruiting and hiring of postdocs. We conducted a pilot study on postdoctoral hiring in the Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at the California Institute of Technology to serve as a starting point to better understand postdoctoral recruiting and hiring processes. From this survey of both postdocs and faculty, together with the available literature, the picture emerges that the postdoc hiring process is more decentralized than either faculty hiring or graduate admissions. Postdoc positions are often filled through a passive process where the initial expression of interest from a prospective postdoc is through a "cold-call" contact to a prospective advisor. Individual faculty members are often responsible for developing and implementing their own outreach and recruitment plans and deciding who to hire into a postdoc position. The overall opacity of the processes and practices by which postdocs are identified, recruited, and hired make it difficult to pinpoint where interventions could be effective to ensure equitable hiring practices. Implementation of such practices is critical to training a diverse postdoc population and subsequently of the future STEM faculty recruited from this group.

scientific communication and education↗