Communicating Scientific Norms in the Hybrid Media Environment: A Mixed-Method Analysis of Social Media Engagement With Watchdog Science Journalism

Hybrid media systems have reconfigured online journalism and mass communication such that people can engage more easily in multi-directional discourse about the norms of science. We investigate this reconfiguration with a mixed-methods study of the X page of “Retraction Watch,” which produces hybrid “watchdog science journalism” on violations of scientific norms. Results show that Retraction Watch’s X is not necessarily an inclusive forum for open debate about scientific norms. We also find that Retraction Watch prioritizes aspects that may not resonate with its audience. This has implications for how science communicators and journalists approach (hybrid) debate about scientific norms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Published
2025-04-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990251334112
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.34
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Communicating Scientific Norms in the Hybrid Media Environment: A Mixed-Method Analysis of Social Media Engagement With Watchdog Science Journalism

Niels G. Mede, Kaiping Chen, Isabel I. Villanueva
1 citations
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
5.34
article

Communicating Scientific Norms in the Hybrid Media Environment: A Mixed-Method Analysis of Social Media Engagement With Watchdog Science Journalism

Niels G. Mede, Kaiping Chen, Isabel I. Villanueva
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Hybrid media systems have reconfigured online journalism and mass communication such that people can engage more easily in multi-directional discourse about the norms of science. We investigate this reconfiguration with a mixed-methods study of the X page of “Retraction Watch,” which produces hybrid “watchdog science journalism” on violations of scientific norms. Results show that Retraction Watch’s X is not necessarily an inclusive forum for open debate about scientific norms. We also find that Retraction Watch prioritizes aspects that may not resonate with its audience. This has implications for how science communicators and journalists approach (hybrid) debate about scientific norms.

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), University of Zurich (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
5.34
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.