A case study exploring associations between popular media attention of scientific research and scientific citations.

P Sage Anderson,Megan Frost,Lance E Davidson,Jordan B Jones,Hunter M Gray,Christopher Wilson,Joseph G Hadfield,William F Christensen,Aubrey R Odom,Matthew K Seeley,Alyssa Evans-Pickett,Todd Hollingshead,Lutz Bornmann

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0234912

Abstract

The association between mention of scientific research in popular media (e.g., the mainstream media or social media platforms) and scientific impact (e.g., citations) has yet to be fully explored. The purpose of this study was to clarify this relationship, while accounting for some other factors that likely influence scientific impact (e.g., the reputations of the scientists conducting the research and academic journal in which the research was published). To accomplish this purpose, approximately 800 peer-reviewed articles describing original research were evaluated for scientific impact, popular media attention, and reputations of the scientists/authors and publication venue. A structural equation model was produced describing the relationship between non-scientific impact (popular media) and scientific impact (citations), while accounting for author/scientist and journal reputation. The resulting model revealed a strong association between the amount of popular media attention given to a scientific research project and corresponding publication and the number of times that publication is cited in peer-reviewed scientific literature. These results indicate that (1) peer-reviewed scientific publications receiving more attention in non-scientific media are more likely to be cited than scientific publications receiving less popular media attention, and (2) the non-scientific media is associated with the scientific agenda. These results may inform scientists who increasingly use popular media to inform the general public and scientists concerning their scientific work. These results might also inform administrators of higher education and research funding mechanisms, who base decisions partly on scientific impact.

Highlights

IntroductionScientific impact (SI; defined generally as the amount of attention given to scientific research by scientists) is difficult to quantify, SI is often thought to reflect research productivity and prestige
A measurement of Scientific impact (SI) using citation counts does not account for another important facet of scientific research: non-scientific impact (NSI; defined generally as the amount of attention given to scientific research by non-scientists in mainstream news outlets, online blogs, and/or social media)
A general consensus among the following assessments indicated that the model reasonably characterizes relationships among the measurable variables associated with NSI, SI, AR, and JR: root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), SRMR, and Bentler’s comparative fit index (CFI) (CFI; χ2 = 453.796, with p value < 0.0001; RMSEA = 0.091; SRMR = 0.057; CFI = 0.951)

Summary

Introduction

Scientific impact (SI; defined generally as the amount of attention given to scientific research by scientists) is difficult to quantify, SI is often thought to reflect research productivity and prestige. A measurement of SI (as previously defined) using citation counts does not account for another important facet of scientific research: non-scientific impact (NSI; defined generally as the amount of attention given to scientific research by non-scientists in mainstream news outlets, online blogs, and/or social media). The relationship between NSI and SI is unclear, previous research has indicated a potential relationship between the mention of scientific research in popular media (e.g., mainstream news or social media) and scientific impact (e.g., citation count; [8,9,10,11,12,13,14])

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion