Rapid collaborative knowledge building via Twitter after significant geohazard events

Q2 Social Sciences
R. Lacassin, M. Devès, S. Hicks, J. Ampuero, R. Bossu, L. Bruhat, Desianto F. Wibisono, Laure Fallou, E. Fielding, A. Gabriel, Jamie Gurney, Janine Krippner, A. Lomax, Muh. Ma'rufin Sudibyo, A. Pamumpuni, J. Patton, Helen Robinson, M. Tingay, S. Valkaniotis
{"title":"Rapid collaborative knowledge building via Twitter after significant geohazard events","authors":"R. Lacassin, M. Devès, S. Hicks, J. Ampuero, R. Bossu, L. Bruhat, Desianto F. Wibisono, Laure Fallou, E. Fielding, A. Gabriel, Jamie Gurney, Janine Krippner, A. Lomax, Muh. Ma'rufin Sudibyo, A. Pamumpuni, J. Patton, Helen Robinson, M. Tingay, S. Valkaniotis","doi":"10.5194/gc-2019-23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Twitter is an established social media platform valued by scholars as an open way to disseminate scientific information and to publicly discuss research results. Scientific discussions on Twitter are viewed by the media, who can then pass on information to the wider public. Social media is used widely by geoscientists, but there is little documentation currently available regarding the benefits or limitations of this for the scientist or the public. Here, we use the example of two 2018 earthquake-related events that were widely commented on by geoscientists on Twitter: the Palu Mw 7.5 earthquake and related tsunami in Indonesia and the long-duration Mayotte island seismovolcanic crisis in the Indian Ocean. We built our study on a content and contextual analysis of selected Twitter threads about the geophysical characteristics of these events. From the analysis of these two examples, we show that Twitter promotes a very rapid building of knowledge in the minutes to hours and days following an event via an efficient exchange of information and active discussion between the scientists themselves and the public. We discuss the advantages and potential pitfalls of this relatively novel way of making scientific information accessible to scholarly peers and lay people. We argue that scientific discussion on Twitter breaks down the traditional “ivory tower” of academia, contributes to the growing trend towards open science, and may help people to understand how science is developed and, in turn, to better understand the risks related to natural/environmental hazards.\n","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoscience Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2019-23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

Abstract

Abstract. Twitter is an established social media platform valued by scholars as an open way to disseminate scientific information and to publicly discuss research results. Scientific discussions on Twitter are viewed by the media, who can then pass on information to the wider public. Social media is used widely by geoscientists, but there is little documentation currently available regarding the benefits or limitations of this for the scientist or the public. Here, we use the example of two 2018 earthquake-related events that were widely commented on by geoscientists on Twitter: the Palu Mw 7.5 earthquake and related tsunami in Indonesia and the long-duration Mayotte island seismovolcanic crisis in the Indian Ocean. We built our study on a content and contextual analysis of selected Twitter threads about the geophysical characteristics of these events. From the analysis of these two examples, we show that Twitter promotes a very rapid building of knowledge in the minutes to hours and days following an event via an efficient exchange of information and active discussion between the scientists themselves and the public. We discuss the advantages and potential pitfalls of this relatively novel way of making scientific information accessible to scholarly peers and lay people. We argue that scientific discussion on Twitter breaks down the traditional “ivory tower” of academia, contributes to the growing trend towards open science, and may help people to understand how science is developed and, in turn, to better understand the risks related to natural/environmental hazards.
在重大地质灾害事件发生后,通过Twitter快速建立协作知识
摘要Twitter是一个成熟的社交媒体平台,被学者们视为传播科学信息和公开讨论研究成果的开放途径。Twitter上的科学讨论由媒体查看,然后媒体可以将信息传递给更广泛的公众。地球科学家广泛使用社交媒体,但目前很少有关于科学家或公众使用社交媒体的好处或局限性的文件。在这里,我们以2018年地球科学家在Twitter上广泛评论的两起地震相关事件为例:印度尼西亚帕卢7.5级地震及相关海啸,以及印度洋马约特岛持续时间较长的地震火山危机。我们的研究建立在关于这些事件的地球物理特征的选定Twitter线程的内容和上下文分析上。通过对这两个例子的分析,我们发现Twitter通过科学家自己和公众之间有效的信息交换和积极的讨论,在事件发生后的几分钟到几小时甚至几天内促进了知识的快速建立。我们讨论了这种相对新颖的方式的优点和潜在的陷阱,使学术同行和非专业人士获得科学信息。我们认为,Twitter上的科学讨论打破了学术界传统的“象牙塔”,促进了开放科学的发展趋势,并可能帮助人们理解科学是如何发展的,从而更好地理解与自然/环境危害相关的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geoscience Communication
Geoscience Communication Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信