Peer-reviewed scholarly works are contributions to the advancement of knowledge.
Because researchers cite their sources, citations can measure the use (or impact? Quality? Importance?) of a contribution to knowledge.
Papers aren’t just cited in other papers, they get tweeted, liked, shared, discussed, added to reference managers, and cited in policy documents, patents, or the news.
The number of engagements a paper receives is an indication of something.
Our work examines the relationship between the act of tweeting and citing a paper considering the characteristics of the tweeter and their work, the tweeted paper and its authors, and the relationship between them.
In other words: Do researchers cite what they tweet?
|Geographic||Same country, Same institution|
|Socio-topical||Same domain, Same field, Same subfield, Same journal, Co-author, Self-Tweet|
|Individual||Academic age, Number of tweets, Number of papers, number of references|
Open dataset of 500,000 scholars on Twitter (Mongeon, Bowman, and Costas 2023)
Open dataset of scholars and scholarly works (OpenAlex) (Priem, Piwowar, and Orr 2022)
Open dataset of tweets with links to DOIs (CrossRef)
A classification of journals (Archambault, Beauchesne, and Caruso 2011)
Our dataset: 5.3M tweets with data for all variables considered.