{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,8]],"date-time":"2026-06-08T11:48:42Z","timestamp":1780919322210,"version":"3.54.1"},"reference-count":20,"publisher":"Emerald","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,19]],"date-time":"2014-05-19T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1400457600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/site-policies"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,19]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Purpose<\/jats:title><jats:p>\u2013 The purpose of this paper is to analyze the tweeting behavior of 37 astrophysicists on Twitter and compares their tweeting behavior with their publication behavior and citation impact to show whether they tweet research-related topics or not.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Design\/methodology\/approach<\/jats:title><jats:p>\u2013 Astrophysicists on Twitter are selected to compare their tweets with their publications from Web of Science. Different user groups are identified based on tweeting and publication frequency.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Findings<\/jats:title><jats:p>\u2013 A moderate negative correlation (<jats:italic>\u03c1<\/jats:italic>=\u22120.339) is found between the number of publications and tweets per day, while retweet and citation rates do not correlate. The similarity between tweets and abstracts is very low (cos=0.081). User groups show different tweeting behavior such as retweeting and including hashtags, usernames and URLs.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Research limitations\/implications<\/jats:title><jats:p>\u2013 The study is limited in terms of the small set of astrophysicists. Results are not necessarily representative of the entire astrophysicist community on Twitter and they most certainly do not apply to scientists in general. Future research should apply the methods to a larger set of researchers and other scientific disciplines.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Practical implications<\/jats:title><jats:p>\u2013 To a certain extent, this study helps to understand how researchers use Twitter. The results hint at the fact that impact on Twitter can neither be equated with nor replace traditional research impact metrics. However, tweets and other so-called altmetrics might be able to reflect other impact of scientists such as public outreach and science communication.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Originality\/value<\/jats:title><jats:p>\u2013 To the best of the knowledge, this is the first in-depth study comparing researchers\u2019 tweeting activity and behavior with scientific publication output in terms of quantity, content and impact.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1108\/ajim-09-2013-0081","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2014,6,10]],"date-time":"2014-06-10T16:22:09Z","timestamp":1402417329000},"page":"279-296","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":43,"title":["Astrophysicists on Twitter"],"prefix":"10.1108","volume":"66","author":[{"given":"Stefanie","family":"Haustein","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Timothy D.","family":"Bowman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Kim","family":"Holmberg","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Isabella","family":"Peters","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Vincent","family":"Larivi\u00e8re","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"140","reference":[{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b1","unstructured":"Bauer, A.E. (2013), \u201cAstropixie: astronomy engagement through blogging and Twitter\u201d, Communicating Science: A National Conference on Science Education and Public Outreach, Tucson, AZ , Vol. 473, pp. 173-178."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Boyd, D. , Golder, S. and Lotan, G. (2010), \u201cTweet, tweet, retweet: conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter\u201d, Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Honolulu, HI, pp. 1-10.","DOI":"10.1109\/HICSS.2010.412"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Burgess, J. and Bruns, A. (2012), \u201cTwitter archives and the challenges of \u2018Big Social Data\u2019 for media and communication research\u201d, M\/C Journal , Vol. 15 No. 5, available at: http:\/\/journal.media-culture.org.au\/index.php\/mcjournal\/article\/view\/561 (accessed September 11, 2013).","DOI":"10.5204\/mcj.561"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Eysenbach, G. (2011), \u201cCan tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact\u201d, Journal of Medical Internet Research , Vol 13 No. 4, e123, doi:10.2196\/jmir.2012.","DOI":"10.2196\/jmir.2012"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Haustein, S. and Peters, I. (2012), \u201cUsing social bookmarks and tags as alternative indicators of journal content description\u201d, First Monday , Vol 17 No. 11, doi:10.5210\/fm.v17i11.4110.","DOI":"10.5210\/fm.v17i11.4110"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Haustein, S. , Peters, I. , Sugimoto, C.R. , Thelwall, M. and Larivi\u00e8re, V. (2014), \u201cTweeting biomedicine: an analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature\u201d, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 656-669.","DOI":"10.1002\/asi.23101"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b7","unstructured":"Holmberg, K. and Thelwall, M. (2013), \u201cDisciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication\u201d, Proceedings of ISSI 2013 14th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Vienna, Vol. 1, pp. 567-582."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kieslinger, B. , Ebner, M. and Wiesenhofer, H. (2011), \u201cMicroblogging practices of scientists in e-learning: a qualitative approach\u201d, International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning , Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 31-39.","DOI":"10.3991\/ijet.v6i4.1820"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b9","unstructured":"Letierce, J. , Passant, A. , Decker, S. and Breslin, J.G. (2010), \u201cUnderstanding how Twitter is used to spread scientific messages\u201d, Proceedings of the Web Science Conference, Raleigh, NC, April 26-27, available at: http:\/\/journal.webscience.org\/314\/2\/websci10_submission_79.pdf (accessed February 28, 2014)."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b10","unstructured":"Mahrt, M. , Weller, K. and Peters, I. (2014), \u201cTwitter in scholarly communication\u201d, in Weller, K. et al. (Eds), Twitter and Society , Peter Lang, New York, NY, pp. 399-410."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ponte, D. and Simon, J. (2011), \u201cScholarly communication 2.0: exploring researchers\u2019 opinions on Web 2.0 for scientific knowledge creation, evaluation and dissemination\u201d, Serials Review , Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 149-156.","DOI":"10.1080\/00987913.2011.10765376"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b12","unstructured":"Reinhardt, W. , Ebner, M. , Beham, G. and Costa, C. (2009), \u201cHow people are using Twitter during conferences\u201d, Proceedings of the 5th EduMedia Conference, Salzburg, pp. 145-165."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rowlands, I. , Nicholas, D. , Russell, B. , Canty, N. and Watkinson, A. (2011), \u201cSocial media use in the research workflow\u201d, Learned Publishing , Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 183-195.","DOI":"10.1087\/20110306"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b14","unstructured":"Salton, G. and McGill, M.J. (1987), Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval , McGraw-Hill, New York, NY."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b15","unstructured":"Schmid, H. (1994), \u201cProbabilistic part-of-speech tagging using decision trees\u201d, Proceedings of the International Conference on New Methods in Language Processing, Manchester, pp. 44-49."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Shuai, X. , Pepe, A. and Bollen, J. (2012), \u201cHow the scientific community reacts to newly submitted preprints: article downloads, Twitter mentions, and citations\u201d, PLoS ONE , Vol 7 No. 11, e47523, doi:10.1371\/journal.pone.0047523.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0047523"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Thelwall, M. , Haustein, S. , Larivi\u00e8re, V. and Sugimoto, C. (2013), \u201cDo altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other candidates\u201d, PLoS ONE , Vol 8 No. 5, e64841, doi:10.1371\/journal.pone.0064841.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0064841"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Van Eck, N.J. , Waltman, L. , Noyons, E.C.M. and Buter, R.K. (2010), \u201cAutomatic term identification for bibliometric mapping\u201d, Scientometrics , Vol. 82 No. 3, pp. 581-596.","DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-010-0173-0"},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b19","unstructured":"Weller, K. and Puschmann, C. (2011), \u201cTwitter for scientific communication: how can citations\/references be identified and measured?\u201d, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Conference on Web Science, Koblenz, June 14, available at: http:\/\/journal.webscience.org\/500\/1\/153_paper.pdf (accessed September 11, 2013)."},{"key":"key2021010102355103700_b20","unstructured":"Weller, K. , Dr\u00f6ge, E. and Puschmann, C. (2011), \u201cCitation analysis in twitter: approaches for defining and measuring information flows within tweets during scientific conferences\u201d, in Rowe, M. , Stankovic, M. , Dadzie, A.-S. and Hardey, M. (Eds), Making Sense of Microposts (No. MSM2011), Workshop at Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2011), Crete , CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Greece publisher, Heraklion, pp. 1-12 available at: http:\/\/ceur-ws.org\/Vol-718\/paper_04.pdf (accessed September 11, 2013)."}],"container-title":["Aslib Journal of Information Management"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emeraldinsight.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1108\/AJIM-09-2013-0081","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/AJIM-09-2013-0081\/full\/xml","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/AJIM-09-2013-0081\/full\/html","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,24]],"date-time":"2025-07-24T23:01:11Z","timestamp":1753398071000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emerald.com\/ajim\/article\/66\/3\/279-296\/40899"}},"subtitle":["An in-depth analysis of tweeting and scientific publication behavior"],"editor":[{"given":"Dr","family":"Axel Bruns and Dr Katrin Weller","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"editor"}]}],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,19]]},"references-count":20,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,19]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1108\/AJIM-09-2013-0081"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1108\/ajim-09-2013-0081","relation":{},"ISSN":["2050-3806"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2050-3806","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,19]]}}}