58
for Scientists The Benefits and Barriers of Social Media Craig R. McClain @DrCraigMc

The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

for Scientists

The Benefits and

Barriers ofSocial Media

Craig R. McClain @DrCraigMc

Page 2: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Deep Sea News

Deep SeaNews

DSN#deepsn

deepseanews.com @deepseanews

Page 3: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Why Should I Even Give A Flying Flip?

Page 4: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

If I Google YouWhat Would I Find?

1.You’re on online whether you want to be or not.

2.If you’re not curating your identity someone else is.

3.Make sure you create your content.

If I Google You, What Would I Find?

Page 5: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 6: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

More than half of the human race is under the age of 30,

they've never known life without the internet.

Guess how they feel about social media?

Page 7: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

3 out of 4 Americans use social technology -Forrester, The Growth of Social Technology Adoption, 2008

Page 8: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

All media is now social media

Technology is shifting the power away from

editors, the publishers, the establishment, the

media elite.

Now it's the people who are in control.

-Rupert Murdoch

Page 9: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

If Facebook were a country it would be the third most populated in the world ahead of the United States

In Billions !China 1.35 India 1.21 Facebook 1.06 U.S. 0.31 !http://news.yahoo.com/number-active-users-facebook-over-230449748.html

Page 10: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

5 billion pieces* of content a week on Facebook in 2010* web links, news stories, blog posts, notes, photo albums, etc.

http://www.insidefacebook.com/2010/02/15/new-facebook-statistics-show-big-increase-in-content-sharing-local-business-pages/

Page 11: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

http://www.dailyillini.com/features/health_and_living/article_323b7fd8-966a-11e2-b435-001a4bcf6878.html

1/3 of women aged 18-34 check Facebook when they first wake up !...even before going to the bathroom

Page 12: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

As of April, 500 million total users and more than 200 million active users on Twitter

http://expandedramblings.com/index.php/resource-how-many-people-use-the-top-social-media/

Page 13: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 14: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

So What Do I Do Online?

Page 15: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Social media is a tool like a microscope. It can be used well and badly.

It can be used to do a lot of different things.

!-Jon Eisen

Page 16: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

social media is like water. on its own, water does some cool things, but when combined with other compounds it enabled the evolution of all forms of life. !social media on its own is nice, but when combined with other tools, it is enabling everything to evolve, from communications to business to politics to marketing !Mike Volpe VP Marketing HubSpot

Page 17: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

What is your online mission? Personal? Outreach? Science? Consume, Share, Filter, Generate?

Page 18: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Inreach

versus

Outreach

*

*James Brown has nothing to do with this. I simply have always wanted to put a photo of James Brown dancing in a presentation. I also want to make sure you are still awake.

Page 19: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Social Media for Scientific Benefit

Page 20: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

In terms of inreach, social media has become an important tool in quickly connecting with other researchers (Priem and Costello 2010). !“This is the dilemma faced by researchers in the electronic age. How can we be expected to produce both quality and quantity and to yield influential research? We simply cannot—at least not on our own. Instead, we must rely on networking and collaborations to build our research programs and to remain influential in our fields in order to advance scientific knowledge. With this collaborative view in mind, scientific influence involves the body of work of both individual researchers and of research groups as a whole.”

Page 21: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 22: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 23: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 24: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 25: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Crowd Sourcing Science

Page 26: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Conferences

Page 27: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Blogs written by scientists for scientists are becoming common and important places for the exchange of ideas

Page 28: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

One way that the social media appears does not to impact a scientific career is a direct link of social media mentions and citations on a scientific article. !In an analysis of 1.4 million documents in PubMed and Web of Science published from 2010 to 2012, Haustein et al. (2013) found no correlation between a paper or a journals citation count and Twitter mentions.

Page 29: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

As argued by the authors of the study (Haustein et al. 2013), this suggests that Twitter mentions do not reflect traditional research impact. Indeed, social media mentions may capture a previously unquantified impact of a scientist’s career (Priem et al. 2012).

Social Media Will Increase Exposure

Page 30: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 31: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 32: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Social Media for Public Outrech

Page 33: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Most of Social Media Outreach is a Mystery !

We often don’t know the goal or the path.

Page 34: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Science: A Public Relations Nightmare?this  public  rela.ons  nightmare”  is  been  the  pla4orm  in  which  scien.sts  have  been  encourage  to  “take  responsibility  for  science  communica.on  in  a  digital  age”  (Wilcox  2012).    

may  not  simply  be  an  issue  of  the  public  percep.on  on  the  credibility  or  worth  of  scien.sts    but  rather  the  strategies  we  use  to  communicate  the  public.

Page 35: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Are Scientists Poor Communicators?Nearly  30%  of  scien.sts  in  one  study  stated  that  “scien.sts  are  poor  interpersonal  communicators  or  that  nonscien.sts  perceive  them  to  be  uniformly  inept  at  communica.on,  regardless  of  their  actual  abili.es”  (Ecklund  and  Lincoln,  2012).        !In  the  same  study  37%  of  scien.sts  placed  the  blame  poor  outreach  efforts  on  scien.sts  themselves  (Ecklund  and  Lincoln,  2012).    

graduate/medical--student-17%-

medical-doctor-2%-

research-scien6st-45%-

science-professional-

8%-

teacher-3%-

writer/journalist-25%-

Open Lab 2013 anthology of the best science writing online

Page 36: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Are Scientists Not Engaging the Public?

• Scien.sts  do  not  believe  that  their  colleagues  actually  engage  in  outreach  (Ecklund  and  Lincoln,  2012)  !

•Nearly  half  of  all  academic  scien.sts  ere  engaged  in  some  type  of  outreach  (Ecklund  and  Lincoln,  2012)  • Scien.sts  have  a  posi.ve  aOtude  toward  par.cipa.ng  in  public  engagement  (Ecklund  and  Lincoln,  2012).  !

• 20%  of  respondents  engaged  online  personally  (Allgaier  et  al.  2013)  • 44%  of  German  and  65%  of  United  States  scien.sts  thought  that  these  channels  “can  strongly  influence  

how  the  public  thinks  about  science”  (Allgaier  et  al.  2013)

Page 37: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Are Scientists Not Engaging the Public?

•Over  62%  of  respondents  give  media  interviews  • 59%  provide  assistance  to  government  agencies  • 59%  give  talks  or  presenta.ons  to  the  general  public.      !

• 39%  do  not,  and  never  will,  use  TwiZer  for  academic/professional  work;    • 35%  say  the  same  for  Facebook  (though  58%  use  TwiZer  and  Facebook  for  personal  use).

Page 38: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Are Scientists Not Engaging the Public?

•Wilkinson  and  Weitkamp  (2013)  survey  of  researchers  whose  work  had  been  highlighted  in  policy-­‐relevant  newsleZers  !!

• “For  the  majority  of  researchers,  there  has  been  liZle  change  in  the  use  of  media  to  communicate  with  non-­‐academic  audiences  over  the  past  five  years.    !

• As  Table  3  indicates  social  media  are  rarely  used  as  a  means  for  communica.ng  with  non-­‐academics,    • 73%  (n=97)  never  used  TwiZer,    • 64%  (n=84)  never  used  blogs  and    • 51%  (n=67)  never  use  online  news  forums.

Page 39: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Are Scientists Not Engaging the Public?

Page 40: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Is the Deficit Model Effective?

!Scholars  have  examined  dynamics  such  as    

!• how  real-­‐world  exposure  to  science  stories  

influences  science  beliefs  (Hwang  &  Southwell,  2009),    

• how  narra.ve  structure  may  affect  interpreta.on  (Dahlstrom,  2010;  Yaros,  2006),    

• and  how  various  mediums  may  differen.ally  affect  public  percep.ons  (Nisbet  et  al.,  2002)

• 70%  of  scien.sts  express  a  percep.on  of  public  ignorance  

• 30%  blame  a  disinterest  in  science  

• “widespread  lack  of  scien.fic  knowledge  among  the  general  public  is  a  difficulty  in  communica.ng  

advanced  scien.fic  discoveries  beyond  the  borders  of  the  academic  science  community”.  

• “Scien.sts  view  their  role  in  outreach  as  mainly  to  fill  a  void    

• in  knowledge  among  members  of  the  general  public“

Page 41: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Is the Deficit Model Effective?Vaccine  Risk  Percep.ons  and  Ad  Hoc  Risk  Communica.on:  An  Empirical  Assessment-­‐Dan  M.  Kahan  

!• Based  on  survey  and  experimental  methods  (N  =  2,316),  the  Report  presents  two  principal  findings:    

!1. that  vaccine  risks  are  neither  a  maZer  of  concern  for  the  vast  majority  of  the  public  nor  an  issue  of  conten.on  

among  recognizable  demographic,  poli.cal,  or  cultural  subgroups;    2. that  ad  hoc  forms  of  risk  communica.on  that  assert  there  is  moun.ng  resistance  to  childhood  immuniza.ons  

themselves  pose  a  risk  of  crea.ng  misimpressions  and  arousing  sensibili.es  that  could  culturally  polarize  the  public  and  diminish  mo.va.on  to  cooperate  with  universal  vaccina.on  programs.

Page 42: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

•Most  will  not  have  direct  contact  with  most  of  the  public  via  social  media  

• Tradi.onal  media  is  s.ll  the  gateway  for  informa.on  (SuZon  et  al.)  

• “The  majority  of  our  ques.onnaire  respondents  indicated  that  they  sought  informa.on  using  

• mobile  phones  to  contact  friends  or  family  (54%);    

• through  informa.on  portals  and  websites  adver.sed  in  tradi.onal  media  (76%);    

• by  accessing  alterna.ve  news  sources  and  individual  blogs  (38%);    

• through  discussions  on  various  web  forums  (15%);    

• from  photo-­‐  sharing  sites  such  as  Flickr  or  Picasa  (10%).    

• Just  less  than  10%  of  our  respondents  used  TwiZer,  in  spite  of  the  ac.ve  media  coverage  on  the  

topic.  “

Is Social Media Engaging the Public?

Page 43: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Is Social Media Engaging the Public?

!•At  www.deepseanews.com  the  average  length  spent  on  the  website  in  2013  was  54  seconds    

•87.8%  of  visitors  only  read  a  single  post.      

•Only  12%  of  page  views  were  by  returning  visitors.    

•More  than  50%  of  readers  never  commented  and  near  25%  only  commented  one  or  twice  

•When  surveyed  readers  were  asked  why  they  did  not  comment,  “the  reader  did  not  feel  qualified  

(28.6%),  the  reader  had  nothing  to  add  (25.7%),  or  the  reader  did  not  generally  comment  on  blogs  

(17.1%).”    

•This  suggests  that  social  media  engagement  through  blogs  may  be  short,  superficial,  and  single  serving.  

Deep Sea News

Deep SeaNews

DSN

Page 44: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Nerd of Trust

Page 45: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 46: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists
Page 47: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Is All Information Being Consumed?•One  assump.on  is  that  if  you  broadcast  any  informa.on  via  social  media  it  will  be  consumed  by  the  

public.    • This  is  based  on  the  idea  that  all  social  media  pla4orms  have  massive  usage.      

• Posts  published  at  Deep-­‐Sea  News  for  2013  (N=299),  garnered  1,666,119  page  views.      • Of  these  views,  82.6%  were  

received  on  the  top  20  posts.      • The  lowest  ranking  200  posts  

accounted  for  just  5%  of  total  2013  views.    

• In  a  given  month,  one  billion  people  visit  YouTube  to  watch  6  billion  of  hours  of  video.    • Yet,  many  videos  receive  few  views  

and  less  than  10%  account  for  the  majority  of  views  (Cheng  et  al.  2008).  

Deep Sea News

Deep SeaNews

DSN

Page 48: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Is Social Media Capital Offline Capital?

• In  a  study  with  49  par.cipants,  588  requests  to  help  with  a  class  project  of  labeling  photos  online  nearly  80%  of  the  requests  were  unanswered  (Stefanone  et  al.  2012).    

• Ten  par.cipants  received  no  response  and  nine  only  one  response.    Stefanonone  et  al.  (2012)    

• Another  study  on  2,000  Norwegian  revealed  that  those  who  engaged  in  social  media  had  significantly  higher  face-­‐to-­‐face  interac.ons,  number  of  acquaintances,  and  friends  with  differing  views  than  themselves  (Brandtzaeg  2012)      

• Thaler  et  al  (2012)  suggest  that  social  media  may  be  crea.ng  a  public  only  superficially  involved  with  the  environmental  movement,  i.e.  slack.vism  

• “Facebook  allow  people  to  “like”  a  topic  without  requiring  any  addi.onal  commitment.  While  that  person  may  feel  they  are  lending  support  to  the  topic,  this  can  ar.ficially  increase  the  number  of  people  who  appear  to  be  involved  in  an  issue  (Golden  1998;  Furlong  2004).”

Page 49: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Will Social Media Outreach Benefit A Scientist’s Career?

?

Page 50: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

How and when do things go viral?Berger and Milkman (2012)

• The  results  indicate  that  posi.ve  content  is  more  viral  than  nega.ve  content  

• Virality  is  par.ally  driven  by  physiological  arousal.    

• Content  that  evokes  high-­‐arousal  posi.ve  (awe)  or  nega.ve  (anger  or  anxiety)  emo.ons  is  more  viral.    

• Content  that  evokes  low-­‐arousal,  or  deac.va.ng,  emo.ons  (e.g.,  sadness)  is  less  viral.

Debunking

Page 51: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

How and when do things go viral?

Page 52: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Deep Sea News

Deep SeaNews

DSN

Page 53: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Is Engagement Always Positive?"Your article are such crap and very unscientific. The 3 explanations in your blog, on echinoderms wasting away had no real basis. The claim the because it happened on the East Coast, also happening a decade ago, but you left out that there are plenty of leaks on the East too (Love Canal). Then to make a claim that no other life in the pacific has been showing odd symptoms is an opinion, please be more clear in your work, all you are doing is feeding into misinfo and likely are involved with Koch or some other pro industry. Like reading all the Forbes, op eds. Next you will be citing them about how radiation is just like a banana."

"I've been seeing your LYING disinformation news on Fukushima on MY Facebook page. My writers and I tell the truth about Fukushima radiation and we will not allow you to lie and therefore be guilty of crimes against humanity. You'll be exposed on my website as I'll have one of my writers investigate this disinfo source and then do a write up. My website gets over a mil l ion views/month and FB pagecurrently hosts over 231,000 subscribers. You can either tell the truth, and we won't tell the truth about your lies, or continue lying and read what I said would be done above."

"The JEWS did Fukushima Sabotage and False Flag with HAARP. The JEWS did 9-11 Sabotage and False Flag with HAARP. JAPAN TSUNAMI QUAKE CAUSED PURPOSELY WITH HAARP. Fukushima Sabotage was done with HAARP. The Stuxnet Computer Virus was made in Dimona Israel. HAARP, Fukushima, Sabotage, Benjamin Fulford, Stuxnet Computer Virus, Dimona Israel, Siemens Computers, False Flag,” The Stuxnet computer worm is perhaps the most complicated piece of malicious software ever built; DESIGNED BY JEWS TO SABOTAGE NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS. When are they going to PROSECUTE the JEW OWNERS of HAARP?"

"This article is ridiculous. You are no better than all the fear mongers out there, only instead of actually being concerned about this environmental crisis, you're completely trying to deter everyone from the reality that fukushima is serious and something that needs to be watched closely, as it WILL have dire effects on the entire planet. If you honestly think that fukushima is nothing to be concerned about, you should just kill yourself, you're doing this world absolutely no good."

Page 54: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

The anonymity of the internet makes bullies. How do we deal with them?

Page 55: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Now Go Out There And Get Social!

Page 56: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

social media is like water. on its own, water does some cool things, but when combined with other compounds it enabled the evolution of all forms of life. !social media on its own is nice, but when combined with other tools, it is enabling everything to evolve, from communications to business to politics to marketing !Mike Volpe VP Marketing HubSpot

Page 57: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

Recognize Social Media Outreach is still an experiment. One that you can shape and take part in. That’s exciting

Page 58: The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for Scientists

@DrCraigMc

Deep Sea News

Deep SeaNewsDS

N

http://deepseanews.com

http://craigmcclain.com

most images courtesy of ShutterStock