Thus far, few studies have examined how scientists choose different social media platforms, or how using multiple platforms of social media is related to public engagement with science. This article investigates the role of social media in China’s science communication and scientists’ selective use of them. We found that social media enabled Chinese scientists to avoid relying on legacy media and to develop more interdisciplinary collaborations. In the process, these scientists strategically chose different social media platforms to increase controllability. Despite their preference for the approach of knowledge dissemination rather than dialogues, Chinese scientists tried to avoid the bureaucratic practice of science communication, and instead, they promoted some level of public participation.
AllanS.ColsonV. (2011). Science blogs as competing channels for the dissemination of science news. Journalism, 12, 889-902.
2.
AllgaierJ.DunwoodyS.BrossardD.LoY. Y.PetersH. P. (2013). Journalism and social media as means of observing the contexts of science. Bioscience, 63, 284-287.
3.
AndersonW. (2012). Asia as method in science and technology studies. East Asian Science, Technology and Society, 6, 445-451.
4.
BammanD.O’ConnorB.SmithN. (2012). Censorship and deletion practices in Chinese social media. First Monday, 17. doi:10.5210/fm.v17i3.3943
5.
BattsS. A.AnthisN. J.SmithT. C. (2008). Advancing science through conversations: Bridging the gap between blogs and the academy. PLoS Biology, 6, e240. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060240
6.
BesleyJ. C.NisbetM. (2013). How scientists view the public, the media and the political process. Public Understanding of Science, 22, 644-659.
7.
BhattacharyaS.SrinivasanP.PolgreenP. (2014). Engagement with health agencies on twitter. PloS One, 9, e112235. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0112235
8.
BikH. M.GoldsteinM. C. (2013). An introduction to social media for scientists. PLoS Biology, 11, e1001535. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001535
9.
BonettaL. (2007). Scientists enter the blogosphere. Cell, 129, 443-445.
10.
BonneyR.PhillipsT. B.BallardH. L.EnckJ. W. (2016). Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science?Public Understanding of Science, 25, 2-16.
11.
BrossardD. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U S A, 110(Suppl. 3), 14096-14101.
12.
BrumfielG. (2009). Supplanting the old media?Nature, 458, 274-277.
13.
BucchiM. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: Theories of public communication of science. In BucchiM.TrenchB. (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 57-76). London, England: Routledge.
CollinsK.ShiffmanD.RockJ. (2016). How are scientists using social media in the workplace?PLoS One, 11, e0162680. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0162680
20.
ColsonV. (2011). Science blogs as competing channels for the dissemination of science news. Journalism, 12, 889-902.
21.
DeLucaK. M.BrunnerE.SunY. (2016). Constructing public space: Weibo, WeChat, and the transformative events of environmental activism in China. International Journal of Communication, 10, 321-339.
22.
FanJ.JiaH.PengG.ZhangF. (2013). A study on scientific controversies in social media: Genetically modified golden rice communication in Chinese Weibo. Journalism and Communication, 20 (11), 106-116 (in Chinese).
23.
FettermanD. M. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research by Judith Preissle Goetz; Margaret Diane LeCompte. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
24.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (2009). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
25.
GrandA.DaviesG.HollimanR.AdamsA. (2015). Mapping public engagement with research in a UK University. PLoS One, 10, e0121874. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121874
26.
GrandA.HollimanR.CollinsT.AdamsA. (2016). “We muddle our way through”: Shared and distributed expertise in digital engagement with research. Journal of Science Communication, 15(4), 1-23.
27.
HarwitE. (2016). WeChat: Social and political development of China’s dominant messaging app. Chinese Journal of Communication, 10, 134-156.
28.
IrwinA. (2008). Risk, science and public communication: Third order thinking about scientific culture. In BucchiM.BrianT. (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 199-212). London, England: Routledge.
29.
JarreauP. B. (2015). Science bloggers’ self-perceived communication roles. Journal of Science Communication, 14, A02.
30.
JiaH.LiuL. (2014). Unbalanced progress: The hard road from science popularisation to public engagement with science in China. Public Understanding of Science, 23, 32-37.
31.
JiaH.LiuZ. (2009). The separation of propaganda about science research and mass media: Quantitative and qualitative analysis of science institutions in China. Studies on Science Popularization, 4(1), 17-23 (in Chinese).
32.
JiaH.MiaoW.ZhangZ. A.CaoY. (2017). Road to international publications: An empirical study of Chinese communication scholars. Asian Journal of Communication, 27, 172-192.
KahleK.SharonA. J.Baram-TsabariA. (2016). Footprints of fascination: Digital traces of public engagement with particle physics on CERN’s social media platforms. PLoS One, 11, e0156409. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0156409
35.
KimJ. Y. (2000). Social interaction in computer-mediated communication. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 26, 15-17.
36.
KimS. J. (2016). A repertoire approach to cross-platform media use behavior. New Media & Society, 18, 353-372.
37.
KingG.PanJ.RobertsM. E. (2013). How censorship in China allows government criticism but silences collective expression. American Political Science Review, 107, 326-343.
38.
LampinenA. (2016). Why we need to examine multiple social network sites. Communication and the Public, 1, 489-493.
39.
LeeN. M.VandykeM. S. (2015). Set it and forget it: The one-way use of social media by government agencies communicating science. Science Communication, 37, 533-541.
40.
LeiboldJ. (2011). Blogging alone: China, the internet, and the democratic illusion?Journal of Asian Studies, 70, 1023-1041.
41.
LinZ. (2015). Internet Jianghu: Emergence of China alternative public sphere. China Media Research, 11(3), 1-13.
42.
LiuS.LiuL.CuiJ.LiY.ZhaoJ.TangZ.YaoJ. (2011). Report for the survey on [Chinese] scientists’ involvement in science popularisation. Investigation and Research Briefing of the Policy Research and Publicity Department of China Association for Science and Technology, No. 91, 1-7 (in Chinese).
43.
LoY.-Y. (2016). Online communication beyond the scientific community: Scientists’ use of new media in Germany, Taiwan and the United States to address the public (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
44.
LowreyW. (2006). Mapping the journalism: Blogging relationship. Journalism, 7, 477-500.
45.
LuJ.QiuY. (2013). Microblogging and social change in China. Asian Perspective, 37, 305-331.
46.
LuzónM. J. (2013). Public communication of science in blogs: Recontextualizing scientific discourse for a diversified audience. Written Communication, 30, 428-457.
47.
MahrtM.PuschmannC. (2014). Science blogging: An exploratory study of motives, styles, and audience reactions. Journal of Science Communication, 13, A05.
48.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49.
NisbetM. C.ScheufeleD. A. (2009). What’s next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. American Journal of Botany, 96, 1767-1778.
50.
ObarJ. A.WildmanS. S. (2015). Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue. Telecommunications Policy, 39, 745-750.
RauchfleischA.SchäferM. S. (2015). Multiple public spheres of Weibo: A typology of forms and potentials of online public spheres in China. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 139-155.
53.
SimisM. J.MaddenH.CacciatoreM. A.YeoS. K. (2016). The lure of rationality: Why does the deficit model persist in science communication?Public Understanding of Science, 25, 400-414.
54.
SmallM. L. (2009). “How many cases do I need?” On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography, 10, 5-38.
55.
SmithA. (2016). “Wow, I didn’t know that before; thank you”: How scientists use Twitter for public engagement. Journal of Promotional Communications, 3, 320-339.
56.
SotoM. V.Balls-BerryJ. E.BishopS. G.AaseL. A.TimimiF. K.MontoriV. M.PattenC. A. (2016). Use of web 2.0 social media platforms to promote community-engaged research dialogs: A preliminary program evaluation. JMIR Research Protocols, 5, e183. doi:10.2196/resprot.4808
57.
StilgoeJ.LockS. J.WilsdonJ. (2014). Why should we promote public engagement with science?Public Understanding of Science, 23, 4-15.
TanejaH.WebsterJ. G.MalthouseE. C.KsiazekT. B. (2012). Media consumption across platforms: Identifying user-defined repertoires. New Media & Society, 14, 951-968.
61.
ThurlowC.LengelL. M.TomicA. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the internet. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62.
TuF. (2016). WeChat and civil society in China. Communication and the Public, 1, 343-350.
63.
WangX.GuB. (2016). The communication design of WeChat: ideological as well as technical aspects of social media. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 4, 23-35.
64.
WattersJ. K.BiernackiP. (1989). Targeted sampling: options for the study of hidden populations. Social Problems, 36, 416-430.
65.
WebsterJ. G. (2011). The duality of media: A structurational theory of public attention. Communication Theory, 21, 43-66.
66.
YeoS. K.CacciatoreM. A.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. (2014, May). Twitter as the social media of choice for sharing science. Paper presented at the 13th International Public Communication of Science and Technology Conference, Salvador, Brazil.
67.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68.
ZhangJ. Y. (2015). The “credibility paradox” in China’s science communication: Views from scientific practitioners. Public Understanding of Science, 24, 913-927.
69.
ZhangK.GaoF. (2014). Social media for informal science learning in China: A case study. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 6, 262-280.
70.
ZhaoX.LampeC.EllisonN. B. (2016, May). The social media ecology: User perceptions, strategies and challenges. Paper presented at the 2016 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Santa Clara, CA.
