Social media uptake of scientific journals: A comparison between X and WeChat

This study examines the social media uptake of scientific journals on two different platforms – X and WeChat – by comparing the adoption of X among journals indexed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) with the adoption of WeChat among journals indexed in the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD). The findings reveal substantial differences in platform adoption and user engagement, shaped by local contexts. While only 22.7% of SCIE journals maintain an X account, 84.4% of CSCD journals have a WeChat official account. Journals in Life Sciences & Biomedicine lead in uptake on both platforms, whereas those in Technology and Physical Sciences show high WeChat uptake but comparatively lower presence on X. User engagement on both platforms is dominated by low-effort interactions rather than more conversational behaviours. Correlation analyses indicate weak-to-moderate relationships between bibliometric indicators and social media metrics, confirming that online engagement reflects a distinct dimension of journal impact, whether on an international or a local platform. These findings underscore the need for broader social media metric frameworks that incorporate locally dominant platforms, thereby offering a more comprehensive understanding of science communication practices across diverse social media and contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Information Science
Published
2025-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515251359759
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Social Media in Health Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.17

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Social media uptake of scientific journals: A comparison between X and WeChat

Rodrigo Costas, Zhichao Fang, Ting Cong, Zekun Han
1 citations
Journal of Information Science
Social Media in Health Education
2.17
article

Social media uptake of scientific journals: A comparison between X and WeChat

Rodrigo Costas, Zhichao Fang, Ting Cong, Zekun Han
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study examines the social media uptake of scientific journals on two different platforms – X and WeChat – by comparing the adoption of X among journals indexed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) with the adoption of WeChat among journals indexed in the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD). The findings reveal substantial differences in platform adoption and user engagement, shaped by local contexts. While only 22.7% of SCIE journals maintain an X account, 84.4% of CSCD journals have a WeChat official account. Journals in Life Sciences & Biomedicine lead in uptake on both platforms, whereas those in Technology and Physical Sciences show high WeChat uptake but comparatively lower presence on X. User engagement on both platforms is dominated by low-effort interactions rather than more conversational behaviours. Correlation analyses indicate weak-to-moderate relationships between bibliometric indicators and social media metrics, confirming that online engagement reflects a distinct dimension of journal impact, whether on an international or a local platform. These findings underscore the need for broader social media metric frameworks that incorporate locally dominant platforms, thereby offering a more comprehensive understanding of science communication practices across diverse social media and contexts.

Journal of Information Science
Leiden University (NL), University of Shanghai for Science and Technology (CN), Stellenbosch University (ZA), Renmin University of China (CN), University of Sheffield (GB)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, National Social Science Fund of China
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Social Media in Health Education
2.17
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.