Recent research conducted at the University of Washington has revealed that utilizing X (formerly Twitter) to boost citations of research papers yields minimal impact. In their investigation, the team compared the citation counts of papers promoted on X with those left unadvertised.

Conventionally, research papers garner enhanced credibility when cited by peers engaged in similar fields, potentially leading to career advancements, funding opportunities, and intangible benefits for authors. Consequently, researchers frequently engage in active promotion of their work and associated publications.

Amplifying research visibility

With the advent of social media, many in the scientific community have turned to platforms like X to amplify their research visibility. In this study, the research team sought to assess the tangible effects of such efforts.

Tracking the citation trajectories of their papers over three years, both promoted and unpromoted on X, the researchers observed that promoting papers on the platform did not significantly influence citation counts. However, substantial enhancements were noted in Altmetrics scores, which gauge the dissemination of posts, downloads, views, or links. This indicated that while the papers may not have attracted more citations, the underlying research was reaching a broader audience.

Despite the absence of citation boosts, the research team underscored the ancillary benefits of tweeting about their work, including heightened awareness within and beyond scientific circles. Such increased visibility, they argued, not only benefits researchers but also society at large, potentially garnering support from public officials, among others.

Emphasizing the broader impact of science promotion, the researchers highlighted its role in fostering further scientific endeavors. They also noted the gratification derived from non-scientists’ enthusiastic responses to their work, underscoring the excitement of sharing scientific findings with diverse audiences.