Abstract
Science communication has diversified in the wake of the digital transformation of communication and media ecosystems. Social media enable universities, but also academics and institutions affiliated with them, to expand their communication. This leads to increasing plurivocality of universities, yet the many different voices remain largely unexplored. This study develops a typology to conceptually distinguish eight voices by their representational role, hierarchical embeddedness, type, and affiliation. Based on a quantitative content and social network analysis of more than 600 Twitter accounts linked to a research university, it identifies six types of voices empirically. The study compares interactions among these voices, showing differences between central and decentral, as well as institutional and individual voices, and highlighting closer exchanges between voices within the same disciplinary communities. It also examines topics and tonality, revealing that decentral institutional voices engage most in science-related topics, and that only current and former students express critical views.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
