<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><sec><h3>Purpose</h3><p>In recent years, one can witness a trend in research evaluation to measure the impact on society or attention to research by society (beyond science). We address the following question: can Twitter be meaningfully used for the mapping of public and scientific discourses?</p></sec><sec><h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3><p>Recently, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_jdis-2020-0017_ref_005_w2aab3b7c16b1b6b1ab2b2b5Aa">Haunschild et al. (2019)</xref> introduced a new network-oriented approach for using Twitter data in research evaluation. Such a procedure can be used to measure the public discussion around a specific field or topic. In this study, we used all papers published in the Web of Science (WoS, Clarivate Analytics) subject category Information Science &amp; Library Science to explore the publicly discussed topics from the area of library and information science (LIS) in comparison to the topics used by scholars in their publications in this area.</p></sec><sec><h3>Findings</h3><p>The results show that LIS papers are represented rather well on Twitter. Similar topics appear in the networks of author keywords of all LIS papers, not tweeted LIS papers, and tweeted LIS papers. The networks of the author keywords of all LIS papers and not tweeted LIS papers are most similar to each other.</p></sec><sec><h3>Research limitations</h3><p>Only papers published since 2011 with DOI were analyzed.</p></sec><sec><h3>Practical implications</h3><p>Although Twitter data do not seem to be useful for quantitative research evaluation, it seems that Twitter data can be used in a more qualitative way for mapping of public and scientific discourses.</p></sec><sec><h3>Originality/value</h3><p>This study explores a rather new methodology for comparing public and scientific discourses.</p></sec></abstract>

PurposeIn recent years, one can witness a trend in research evaluation to measure the impact on society or attention to research by society (beyond science). We address the following question: can Twitter be meaningfully used for the mapping of public and scientific discourses?Design/methodology/approachRecently, Haunschild et al. (2019) introduced a new network-oriented approach for using Twitter data in research evaluation. Such a procedure can be used to measure the public discussion around a specific field or topic. In this study, we used all papers published in the Web of Science (WoS, Clarivate Analytics) subject category Information Science & Library Science to explore the publicly discussed topics from the area of library and information science (LIS) in comparison to the topics used by scholars in their publications in this area.FindingsThe results show that LIS papers are represented rather well on Twitter. Similar topics appear in the networks of author keywords of all LIS papers, not tweeted LIS papers, and tweeted LIS papers. The networks of the author keywords of all LIS papers and not tweeted LIS papers are most similar to each other.Research limitationsOnly papers published since 2011 with DOI were analyzed.Practical implicationsAlthough Twitter data do not seem to be useful for quantitative research evaluation, it seems that Twitter data can be used in a more qualitative way for mapping of public and scientific discourses.Originality/valueThis study explores a rather new methodology for comparing public and scientific discourses.

Library and Information Science Papers Discussed on Twitter: A new Network-based Approach for Measuring Public Attention

Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research

Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)

Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society

Division for Science and Innovation Studies

Journal of Data and Information Science

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

PurposeIn recent years, one can witness a trend in research evaluation to measure the impact on society or attention to research by society (beyond science)....

	All	Not tweeted	Tweeted	Tweeted and mentioned in the news
All	65	85.9%	74.6%	36.9%
Not tweeted	55	64	58.7%	29.7%
Tweeted	47	37	63	44.4%
Tweeted and mentioned in the news	24	19	28	65

Library and Information Science Papers Discussed on Twitter: A new Network-based Approach for Measuring Public Attention

Article Category: Research Paper

Published Online: Jul 03, 2020

Page range: 5 - 17

Received: Jan 21, 2020

Accepted: May 20, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2020-0017

Keywords
Altmetrics, Twitter, News, Hashtags, Author keywords

© 2020 Robin Haunschild et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Overlap between top author keywords. The lower triangle shows the absolute number of overlapping keywords and the upper triangle shows the proportion of overlapping keywords.

Library and Information Science Papers Discussed on Twitter: A new Network-based Approach for Measuring Public Attention

Article Category: Research Paper

Published Online: Jul 03, 2020

Page range: 5 - 17

Received: Jan 21, 2020

Accepted: May 20, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2020-0017

KeywordsAltmetrics, Twitter, News, Hashtags, Author keywords

© 2020 Robin Haunschild et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Overlap between top author keywords. The lower triangle shows the absolute number of overlapping keywords and the upper triangle shows the proportion of overlapping keywords.

Keywords
Altmetrics, Twitter, News, Hashtags, Author keywords