Do Science <i>Kardashians</i> Get Citation Premium? Self‐Fulfilling Effects of Social Media on Scientific Impact
ABSTRACT We analyze whether the visibility of scientists on social media affects the number of academic citations. We use the global COVID‐19 pandemic as a quasinatural experiment that exogenously increased public attention and the demand for expertise. Using publications on COVID‐related topics by social media stars and their coauthors prior to the outbreak of the pandemic, we find that social media stars' pre‐COVID‐era papers received about – more citations annually per paper after 2019. Quantitatively comparable results are obtained when we use scientists' Kardashian index (K‐index) as a benchmark for stardom, however we find no significant effects when using the intensive margin of scientists' K‐indexes. We provide a brief discussion of policy implications in light of these findings.
Chris Olah on Twitter / X
Research Intimacy: Internalizing obscure knowledge, equations, relationships, and ways of thinking related to a research topic.— Chris Olah (@ch402) August 16, 2020
Social media promotion improves job market outcomes
Social media has transformed how academics disseminate research, but its effect on academic job outcomes remains unclear. Previous research has shown correlations between social media exposure and metrics like citation counts, but these relationships may be confounded by unobserved factors such as researcher quality or access to professional networks. We examine whether social media promotion causally affects job market outcomes in economics through a field experiment on Twitter (now X). We first collect tweets about job market papers from 519 candidates and post them from a dedicated account. We then randomize half of the posts to be quote-tweeted by established economists in the candidates’ fields, and measure the effects on both online visibility and hiring outcomes. We find that posts in the treatment group receive 441% more views and 303% more likes than those in the control group. Candidates whose posts were assigned to be quote-tweeted receive one additional flyout invitation compared to the control group average of 5.4 flyouts. Furthermore, women in the treatment group receive 0.9 more job offers than women in the control group, who receive 3 offers on average. Exploring mechanisms, we find that academic reputation drives these results, with stronger effects for quote-tweets from highly cited scholars and for candidates from top institutions. Our findings suggest social media promotion causally increases research visibility and improves academic job market outcomes.
Social media algorithms can be redesigned to bridge divides — here’s how
"It falls to both the tech companies that built these systems and an engaged public to create technologies designed for social cohesion."
‘I Have a Folder in My Email Called Hate Mail’: Academic Public Engagement, Digital Hate and the Unequally Distributed Risks of Visibility
Public engagement through �traditional� and social media is an increasingly important way for scholars to communicate research w
Ian Preston (@ianopolous.bsky.social)
Mathematician/particle physicist turned privacy researcher. Java Rockstar #Oxford Building a better web - private, self-sovereign identity, p2p, social - with @peergos.org. Public social media undermines democracy. #covidisairborne #maskswork #cleantheair
The Failed Migration of Academic Twitter: A Case Study of...
Following changes in Twitter's ownership in 2022 and subsequent changes to content moderation policies, many in academia looked to move their discourse elsewhere and migration to Mastodon was...
The Failed Migration of Academic Twitter: A Case Study of...
Following changes in Twitter's ownership in 2022 and subsequent changes to content moderation policies, many in academia looked to move their discourse elsewhere and migration to Mastodon was...
Ian Vanagas on Twitter / X
I've been enjoying writing screenshot essays lately because they provide more depth than tweets while being easier to finish and share than blogs.To help with this, I built a little app that makes it easier to make nice looking ones: https://t.co/mybEawgwgFEnjoy! https://t.co/gMHUCMzRbL— Ian Vanagas (@IanVanagas) March 30, 2024
Ali Sina Önder on Twitter / X
Does your social media visibility affect your citations? Yes because social media visibility enhances your "expert" status. Here is the brand new paper with @econ_lessmann and Max Rose: https://t.co/KJaxgOaAYQ @davidstadelmann @MishaTeplitskiy @csugimoto @voxeu @AntonioFatas pic.twitter.com/kioHRJ0gYH— Ali Sina Önder (@asonder79) May 3, 2026
Cas (Stephen Casper) on Twitter / X
It is hard to overstate how disappointing I think this new paper from Oxford, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google (et al) is. I can't take it seriously as academic work, just as propaganda. It also has some very bad scholarship and questionable adherence to research ethics. Having… pic.twitter.com/Z5fBx360ya— Cas (Stephen Casper) (@StephenLCasper) May 13, 2026
Shifts in U.S. Social Media Use, 2020–2024: Decline, Fragmentation, and Enduring Polarization
The social media ecosystem appears to be in flux. Twitter’s rebranding to X has come to symbolize a broader reorganization of online publics – political reshuffling, user attrition, and uncertainty over the role of legacy platforms. Simultaneously, the shift from text-based, networked feeds toward algorithmically curated, short-form video has accelerated, with TikTok setting the pace for the wider ecosystem [18, 14, 16]. At the same time, everyday communication increasingly migrates from large, open networks to semi-private spaces such as group chats and messaging apps. Commentators describe a digital public sphere in transition: smaller, more fragmented, less dominated by traditional social networking sites, and rise of more broadcast-oriented forms of media – with some even suggesting that we are seeing the beginning of the end of the social media era.
A new study suggests that scientists are leaving X (formerly known as Twitter) in significant numbers due to its declining professional value. Many now find Bluesky to be a more effective platform for networking, outreach, and staying updated on research.
36K votes, 1.1K comments. 34M subscribers in the science community. This community is a place to share and discuss new scientific research. Read…
Free Our Feeds
Social media is broken: controlled by a handful of billionaires who shape what people see, say, and believe. These platforms profit from division, exploit user data, and lock people into closed systems.
This problem has gotten significantly worse. As Twitter and other social media have become primary channels for sharing research, academics are now expected to make the same ideas legible and appealing to both the general public (to go "viral") and senior scholars (to get the… https://t.co/zPF3tKzbVa— Shreya Shankar (@sh_reya) July 25, 2026
One of the issues that has come up again and again in my reporting on misinformation and social media is the massive influence social media companies have on research in the field. Last night a preprint dropped that tries to get at this with some numbers. My piece in @science.org (and 🧪🧵 coming):
Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry, preprint claims
www.science.orgI'm excited to finally have a preprint of this paper up, a few years in the making. In it we argue that industry-driven manipulation of social media research is well underway and that norms and institutions in the field are ill-prepared to resist tech's influence. arxiv.org/abs/2510.19894
