The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
Social impact in social media: A new method to evaluate the social impact of research
Open accessAbstract
The social impact of research has usually been analysed through the scientific outcomes produced under the auspices of the research. The growth of scholarly content in social media and the use of altmetrics by researchers to track their work facilitate the advancement in evaluating the impact of research. However, there is a gap in the identification of evidence of the social impact in terms of what citizens are sharing on their social media platforms. This article applies a social impact in social media methodology (SISM) to identify quantitative and qualitative evidence of the potential or real social impact of research shared on social media, specifically on Twitter and Facebook. We define the social impact coverage ratio (SICOR) to identify the percentage of tweets and Facebook posts providing information about potential or actual social impact in relation to the total amount of social media data found related to specific research projects. We selected 10 projects in different fields of knowledge to calculate the SICOR, and the results indicate that 0.43% of the tweets and Facebook posts collected provide linkages with information about social impact. However, our analysis indicates that some projects have a high percentage (4.98%) and others have no evidence of social impact shared in social media. Examples of quantitative and qualitative evidence of social impact are provided to illustrate these results. A general finding is that novel evidences of social impact of research can be found in social media, becoming relevant platforms for scientists to spread quantitative and qualitative evidence of social impact in social media to capture the interest of citizens. Thus, social media users are showed to be intermediaries making visible and assessing evidence of social impact.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Altmetrics, on the other hand, can serve as a valuable index of societal impact, indicating public engagement and interest in research (Bornmann, 2014; Pulido et al., 2018).”
From Can ChatGPT be used to predict citation counts, readership, and social media interaction? An exploration among 2222 scientific abstracts (2024) · cites this paper as Pulido et al., 2018
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Pandemics in the Age of Twitter: Content Analysis of Tweets during the 2009 H1N1 Outbreak
Chew, C., & Eysenbach, G. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014118 · Cited by 1,614
Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science
Lubchenco, J. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.279.5350.491 · Cited by 1,352
What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey
Bornmann, L. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22803 · Cited by 732
#Earthquake: Twitter as a Distributed Sensor System
Crooks, A. T., Croitoru, A., Stefanidis, A., & Radzikowski, J. (2012) · Transactions in GIS · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9671.2012.01359.x · Cited by 470
Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature
Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C. R., Thelwall, M. A., & Larivière, V. (2013) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23101 · Cited by 434
Shuai, X., Pepe, A., & Bollen, J. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047523 · Cited by 327
Reale, E., Avramov, D., Canhial, K., Donovan, C., Flecha, R., Holm, P., Larkin, C., Lepori, B., Mosoni-Fried, J., Oliver, E., et al. (2018) · Research Evaluation · doi:10.1093/reseval/rvx025 · Cited by 258
Self-citationHelming, K., Diehl, K., Kuhlman, T., Jansson, T., Verburg, P. H., Bakker, M., Pérez‐Soba, M., Jones, L., Verkerk, P. J., Tabbush, P., et al. (2011) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-03840-160129 · Cited by 86
Bibliographic Analysis of Nature Based on Twitter and Facebook Altmetrics Data
Xia, F., Su, X., Wang, W. W., Zhang, C., Ning, Z., & Lee, I. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0165997 · Cited by 82
Europe must fund social sciences
Flecha, R., Soler, M., & Sordé, T. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/528193d · Cited by 81
Self-citationMeasuring social impacts in conservation: experience of using the Most Significant Change method
Wilder, L., & Walpole, M. (2008) · Oryx · doi:10.1017/s0030605307000671 · Cited by 59
Hayes, A., Duffy, S. K., O’Grady, M., Jakobsen, J., Galvin, K., Teahan-Dillon, J., Kerry, J. P., Kelly, A. K., O’Doherty, J. V., Higgins, S., et al. (2016) · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.3945/ajcn.116.132530 · Cited by 57
Usefulness of altmetrics for measuring the broader impact of research
Bornmann, L. (2015) · Aslib Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1108/ajim-09-2014-0115 · Cited by 55
Assessment of metabolic phenotypic variability in children’s urine using 1H NMR spectroscopy
Maître, L., Lau, C. E., Vizcaíno, E., Robinson, O., Casas, M., Siskos, A., Want, E. J., Athersuch, T. J., Slama, R., Vrijheid, M., et al. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep46082 · Cited by 35
Science must prepare for impact
Poppy, G. M. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/526007a · Cited by 29
Identifying the Relevance of Research Goals through Collecting Citizens’ Voices on Social Media
Cabré, J., Flecha, R., Ionescu, V., Pulido, C., & Sordé, T. (2017) · International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences · doi:10.17583/rimcis.2017.2652 · Cited by 21
Self-citationOnline conversations among Ontario university students: Environmental concerns
Martinello, N., & Donelle, L. (2012) · Informatics for Health and Social Care · doi:10.3109/17538157.2012.678448 · Cited by 20
The new green revolution : Bridging the gap between science and society
Fresco, L. O. (2015) · Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling · Cited by 9
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pulido, C., Villarejo-Carballido, B., Redondo-Sama, G., & Gómez, A. (2020) · International Sociology · doi:10.1177/0268580920914755 · Cited by 484
Self-citationGupta, M., & Sharma, A. (2021) · World Journal of Clinical Cases · doi:10.12998/wjcc.v9.i19.4881 · Cited by 520
A New Application of Social Impact in Social Media for Overcoming Fake News in Health
Pulido, C., Ruiz-Eugenio, L., Redondo-Sama, G., & Villarejo-Carballido, B. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17072430 · Cited by 271
Self-citationPositive and negative impact of social media in the COVID-19 era
Venegas-Vera, A. V., Colbert, G. B., & Lerma, E. V. (2020) · Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.31083/j.rcm.2020.04.195 · Cited by 223
Kunze, K. N., Polce, E. M., Vadhera, A. S., Williams, B. T., Nwachukwu, B. U., Nho, S. J., & Chahla, J. A. (2020) · The American Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1177/0363546520903703 · Cited by 97
Metadata
- Authors
- Pulido, C. M., Redondo-Sama, G., Sordé-Martí, T., & Flecha, R.
- Affiliations
- Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
- Universidad de Zaragoza (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Pulido, Cristina M.
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2018-08-29
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e0203117
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6114920
- OpenAlex
- W2889275779
- Cited by
- 158
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 14.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Zaguan (University of Zaragoza Repository) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- FP7 Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities (Grant Agreement n° 613202)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- social impact of research, social media, altmetrics, research impact assessment, Twitter, Facebook, citizen participation
- MeSH terms
- Biology, Communication, Humans, Public Health, Research, Social Change, Sociometric Techniques, Genomics, Qualitative Research, Social Media
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
