A role for qualitative research methods in researching a Health Sciences article's microblogging

What is it about?

While social media attention assists with article dissemination, qualitative research into related microblogging practices is scant. In response to these gaps, our article explores how qualitative analysis can contribute to Science Communication studies on microblogging articles. We show how qualitative research can provide a rich contextual framing for how micro-practices relate to important social dynamics. For example, tweet shares for journal articles can be related to debates on paradigms within higher-level social strata in the international Health Sciences. Qualitative approaches also support understandings of how professionals' identity work relates to what they choose to share via original posts, or choose to criticise. A qualitative analysis of interactions on the article and related publications revealed select well-considered, pro-social deliberations and conversations. We identified that these professionals followed a wider range of deliberation practices, than previously described by quantitative SciComm Twitter studies. Practices ranged from being included as part of a lecture-reading list, to language localisation in translating the article's title from English to Spanish, and study participants mentioning their involvement. In addition, in-depth explorations of microblogging data following qualitative methods can contribute to the research process by supporting meta-level critiques of missing data, (mis-) categorisations, and flawed automated (and manual) results. During data preparation and cleaning, a comprehensive view of hyperlink sharing and conversations could be developed, which quantitative extraction alone could not support. For example, through neglecting the general publication paths that fall outside listed academic publications, and related formal correspondence (such as academic letters, and sharing via open resources). All the qualitative-led contributions above were derived from meta-inferences across a multimodal content- and a semantic network analysis. Both sought a better understanding of Twitter users’ sharing of an unorthodox, but popular, article's promotion via Twitter over two years. A qualitative analysis of interactions on the article and related publications revealed select well-considered, pro-social deliberations and conversations. Interestingly, our findings contrast to quantitative research that reported the negative practices in Twitter shares for popular dentistry articles. Monomania underpinned their high tweet counts, with most tweeting being mechanical, seemingly devoid of human thought. Such a difference suggests the need to contextualize micro-level communications within higher-level social strata, such as the Global Health Science field and its key debates. While our study focused on a relatively small communication event, many examples of meaningful exchanges materialized. This indicates the potential value for studying communication events within long-running scientific debates.

Featured Image

Photo by Headway on Unsplash

Photo by Headway on Unsplash

Why is it important?

Big data communication researchers have called for qualitative analysis of online science conversations to better explore their meaning. We identified a scholarly gap in the Science Communication field regarding the role that qualitative methods might play in researching small data regarding micro-bloggers' article communications. Although social media attention assists with academic article dissemination, qualitative research into related microblogging practices is scant. To support calls for the qualitative analysis of such communications, we provided a practical example in analysing a popular Health Sciences article.

Perspectives