A study of social media use for scientific communication and dissemination among Spanish education researchers

Knowledge Management & E-Learning, Vol.16, No.2. Jun 2024 A study of social media use for scientific communication and dissemination among Spanish education researchers Elias Said-Hung Universidad Internacional de La Rioja, Spain Ángela Martín-Gutiérrez Universidad Internacional de La Rioja/University of Seville, Spain Beatriz Marcano Universidad Internacional de La Rioja, Spain Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal (KM&EL) ISSN 2073-7904 Recommended citation: Said-Hung, E., Martín-Gutiérrez, A., & Marcano, B. (2024). A study of social media use for scientific communication and dissemination among Spanish education researchers. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2024.16.012 Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 A study of social media use for scientific communication and dissemination among Spanish education researchers Elias Said-Hung* Faculty of Education Universidad Internacional de La Rioja, Spain E-mail: [email protected]et Ángela Martín-Gutiérrez Faculty of Education Universidad Internacional de La Rioja/University of Seville, Spain E-mail: [email protected] Beatriz Marcano Faculty of Education Universidad Internacional de La Rioja, Spain E-mail: beatriz.m[email protected] *Corresponding author Abstract: This work focuses on understanding how researchers in Spain perceive the importance of social media in scientific communication and dissemination and deepening their understanding of the influential underlying factors. From the initial identification of 5,314 researchers affiliated with higher education institutions in Spain, who published in journals indexed in Scopus and Web of Sciences from 2016 to 2020, 487 were surveyed, and 20 were interviewed. The results show how despite the potential of non-academic social media for the social dissemination of scientific knowledge, use remains low among the researchers surveyed in this study. Also, data allow us to recognize how the time of use of social media and the perception of the training needed influence the perception of the usefulness of social media by Spanish researchers on education. Use that does not seem to be oriented toward dialogue and citizen participation. Higher education institutions should improve the communication and scientific dissemination led by researchers through training and the design of dissemination policies that guarantee an active and general use of them (not only academics but also generalists like Facebook or Youtube) to transfer scientific knowledge to society better. Keywords: Social media; Scientific communication; Dissemination; Knowledge; Higher education Biographical notes: Elias Said-Hung is tenured at the Faculty of Education, member of the SIMI research group and director of the University Master’s Degree in Inclusive and Intercultural Education at the International University of La Rioja (UNIR). He received his Bachelor of Arts in Sociology from the Central University of Venezuela and his PhD in Communication Sciences from the Complutense University of Madrid, Spain. 238 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) Ángela Martín-Gutiérrez is a lecturer in the Department of General Didactics and School Organization of the UNIR and a professor in the Department of Theory and History of Education and Social Pedagogy of the University of Seville. She graduated in Pedagogy and PhD from the University of Seville. Her research areas are focused on vocational training, entrepreneurship, teacher training (initial and permanent), inclusive and intercultural education, and gender and educational collaboration and accredited by Aneca. Beatriz Marcano is a lecturer and Ph.D. in education in Training processes in virtual spaces from the University of Salamanca. Producer and manager of digital content for the incorporation of ICT in education. Online tutor in teacher training courses. Her research areas focus on training and video games, video games and learning, and skills acquisition. Development of teaching digital skills and mastery learning. 1. Introduction The rise of social media in our societies has implied the transformation of traditional communicative referents from the general point of view and an increasingly necessary awareness of the challenge that scientific actors and agents must assume, especially in using this type of digital scenario to guarantee the visibility of the knowledge generated from the academy through the active communication and dissemination of the results generated in the different research processes and activities aimed at society’s culture or scientific education. This challenge has been approached through various avenues. One approach involves studying the utilization and initiatives implemented to promote digital communication scenarios in different scientific fields involving various actors (De Filippo et al., 2019; Fressoli and De Filippo, 2021). Additionally, efforts have been made to foster a research culture that connects the academic world with educational practices and contributes to societal development (Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology, 2020). Since the beginning of the 21st century, movements such as Open Access and Open Science have highlighted the potential that the increasing interconnection of the Internet brings for developing our societies. It also promotes culture or scientific education based on innovation, collaboration, transparency and open access to academic and societal knowledge (Mirowski, 2018). If one reviews scientific production in terms of scientific communication in social media, one can realize that the academic debate on this topic is still incipient. Since the second half of the 2010s, when this topic begins to have a greater relevance within the academic discussion, until reaching its most significant production milestones with the emergence of the Covid-19 Pandemic. This fact has heightened the awareness of the importance of comprehending how social networks communicate and disseminate scientific knowledge. A debate that has focused to date, within the field of Social Sciences, as can be seen in Fig. 1, around five main axes of debate: 1) trying to understand the methodologies associated with production, visibility and participation patterns of scientific communication through social networks (Gertrudix et al., 2021; Güneri et al., 2022; Striewski et al., 2022; Dalyot et al., 2022); 2) recognizing the use of social networks as a resource for socio-sanitary intervention during the Covid-19 Pandemic (Broer & Pröschel, 2022); 3) from the scientific communication carried out from journalism and the digital news media (Miller & Heiland, 2021; Guenther & Joubert, 2021); 4) as a resource for improving bibliometric indicators associated with scientific production (França et al., 2021; Aguaded, Civila & Vizcaíno-Verdú, 2022) and 5) Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 239 conceiving the scientific communication carried out from social networks as a training resource for students (Felahi & Saqri, 2022). Fig. 1. Thematic density in scientific publications associated with scientific communication and social media in WoS and Scopus (from 1985 to 2022). Note. The analysis was conducted using VosViewer, utilizing the binary counting method to estimate the co-occurrence of terms within the titles and abstracts of scientific publications indexed in WoS (N = 1,022) and Scopus (N = 765) that were associated with the search topics of scientific communication and social media. 240 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) Despite the growing increase in the knowledge and use of current digital scenarios (e.g. social networks) at the university academic level, what is indicated in the previous paragraph and Fig. 1, shows us a scenario of academic debate that continues to be low, around the topic raised in this paper. Above all, if we take into account that the level of communication and dissemination carried out for scientific promotion is still low, as pointed out by studies carried out by authors such as Rodríguez-Fernández et al. (2018) or Chugh and Ruhi (2018). The context mentioned above does not favour using this knowledge generated by groups outside the academic area, both at a social (general) level and a professional level. A reality that authors such as Lalangui et al. (2017), Girón Escudero et al. (2019), as well as Boeskens et al. (2020), among others, have not missed an opportunity to account for the necessary promotion of processes aimed at promoting and guaranteeing a framework for continuous training at an educational level, capable of responding to current socio-educational challenges. Zhang and Gao (2014), Cassaniti et al. (2014), Pimmer et al. (2018), and Wong et al. (2022) have emphasized the effectiveness of social networks in informal science learning. Consequently, researchers are believed to be capable of effectively disseminating scientific knowledge through digital platforms and mobile devices. These spaces promote a stronger dedication to learning and enhance the creativity and productivity of researchers and other educational stakeholders, such as students. Due to what has been exposed so far, this work is proposed as an action aimed at promoting access to knowledge, which helps to understand, identify recommendations and promote training actions aimed at improving communication strategies and scientific disclosure through social media by researchers. A purpose that is expected to be achieved from understanding these researchers in Spain’s perception of the importance of social media in communication and scientific dissemination at a social level and identifying the influential underlying factors in this regard. 2. Conceptual framework 2.1. Help-seeking in e-learning The Fourth Industrial Revolution and digitization are changing how people communicate through expanding social media (RRSS), which have been consolidated as channels for socialization, communication and collaboration. Following the COVID-19 outbreak in 2019, social media have been amplified within the academic-scientific field due to the need to disseminate the most recent research and provide the public access to information and Science at the health, societal and educational levels (Calvo Iglesias, 2021). This helps Science attract the necessary social support to prosper from its understanding and use, according to Vizcaíno-Verdú et al. (2020). Science benefits from promoting results associated with a particular topic or speciality and making this knowledge available to society (Escobar-Ortiz and Rincón-Álvarez, 2018). Since the beginning of 2000, the academic world has been promoting movements to promote science transmission in society. Such is the case of the Open Science Movement, aimed at the public distribution of knowledge generated from the research by university professors Bautista-Puig et al. (2019). This movement requires a culture change in the exercise of scientific work by requiring researchers, non-university actors and social disseminators to build solid relationships oriented to creating, storing and sharing contributions (Ayris et al., 2018). The role exercised by researchers must Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 241 transcend the generation of knowledge associated with their field of study in favour of scenarios aimed at circulation, deliberation and social participation available via contemporary communication channels (Brossard, 2013), the generation and production of the scientific content in multimedia formats (e.g., audio, video and text), published in traditional contexts (e.g., conferences, books and scientific articles) and non-traditional digital contexts (e.g., webinars, blogs and social media). This would favour the public understanding of Science and participation, from the interaction and appropriation of knowledge through comments, likes and sharing information with other social actors (Esarey & Wood, 2018; Hargittai, Füchslin & Schäfer, 2018). Currently, three models have dominated and conditioned the debate associated with the digital dissemination of scientific communication, according to authors such as Bucchi (2008) and Palmer and Schibeci (2014). First, a deficit model considers that citizens have a common understanding of the usefulness of scientific knowledge and its practical applicability in their daily work. Second, a model of dialogue contends that citizens must actively work with the scientific knowledge generated to solve local social problems. Third, a participatory model gives citizens an active role in configuring the scientific agenda based on mutual understanding between scientists and citizens, driven by deliberative procedures oriented toward investigating the issues. There are studies within the field of research that highlight the benefits of the use of social media networks, from optimization and access to shared resources, dissemination of research in the international arena, and projection and professional recognition, among others (Fuentes Cancell et al., 2021; Meishar-Tal & Pieterse, 2017; Roig-Vila et al., 2016). Despite these efforts, reports published by organizations such as Wellcome (2021) or the Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (2020) highlight an actual distance between science and society. These reports point out a disconnect between the public and scientists about the usefulness or benefit of scientific knowledge outside of academic spaces and the benefit of promoting scientific communication and dissemination models aimed at dialogue and citizen participation. The context is characterized by the influence of individuals’ age and socio-educational background in determining their engagement with contemporary social media networks. Therefore, for authors such as Farias and Maia (2020), it is necessary to continue reflecting on the factors that may be conditioning scientific communication and dissemination, beginning with how communication is conducted in academia. In academic contexts, we found that scientific collaboration is the strongest predictor of the use of social media (Huang et al., 2020). In academia, collaborative work is enhanced, not only disciplinary but also interdisciplinary. It is common to find on the websites of research centres, scientific journals and research groups collaborating through social media to disseminate the latest news and scientific findings. As shown by the studies of Campos-Freire and Rúas-Araújo (2016) and Rodríguez-Fernández et al. (2018), researchers have highlighted the role of social media as essential tools in communication, access to scientific knowledge and collaboration. However, in practice, the reality is very different; communication and dissemination for scientific promotion and development of educational practices on social media channels remain underutilized (Kilis et al., 2016; Rodríguez-Fernández et al., 2018). It is important to know the types of social media currently used to continue promoting them in the field of research. We can classify social media within the scientific field into academic-social media and non-academic-social media. Campos-Freire et al. (2014) highlight the emergence of countless academic RRSS over the years depending on the area of knowledge of the researchers. Some RRSS that can be highlighted is 242 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) ResearchGate, Academia.edu, Google Scholar, Sciver, Quartzy, Frontiers, Biomedex, MyScienceWork, Cosis.net, ScienceStage, and CiteULike. Authors such as Boudry and Durand-Barthez (2020); Işik and Gökkurt Demirtel (2021); Mandiá-Rubal et al. (2019) state that the most preferred academic network for profile management is ResearchGate since it has a high number of users and consequently presents greater dissemination of its works and research. ResearchGate allows researchers to share publications in open access and preprint before their official publication. Thus, the work is visualized and disseminated among academics and non-academics for feedback before publication. This network’s communication behaviour is characterized by rigorous professional and nonemotional objectivity (Ostermaier‐Grabow & Linek, 2019). Regarding non-academic social media, Alonso-F et al. (2019) believe these are potential gateways for disseminating research. However, most researchers do not have active profiles in non-academic networks despite the benefits obtained and demonstrated in some studies (Montesi et al., 2019). Linek et al. (2018) reveal in their research how the number of reciprocal followers of researchers on Twitter is conceptualized as a more robust indicator of community development. For their part, Vizcaíno-Verdú et al. (2020) show the YouTube platform as an informal channel for scientific dissemination since it allows Science to reach the general public. As the authors indicate, it is an “informal means of emerging scientific literacy”. Despite the above, works such as those carried out by Gertrudix et al. (2021) point to an unequal use of social media by scientists, in which Twitter and Facebook are the leading digital platforms used, in a minimal way, for the tasks indicated above. A use mainly made for contact with academic peers and not for communication with other (non-academic) social agents. Whereas generalist (e.g. YouTube) or more specialized (professional) social media, such as Linkedin, are rarely used. No other antecedents specify the social media in which the scientific debate is developed according to social science researchers’ communication and dissemination plans. According to Meishar-Tal and Pieterse (2017), the rewards that motivate users to access social media are related to four specific dimensions: self-promotion and reinforcement of the ego, the acquisition of professional knowledge, a sense of belonging to a community of peers and an opportunity to interact with other users or researchers. Salinas Ibáñez and Marín Juarros (2019) point out in their study that researchers use social media mainly to disseminate their results in search of personal visibility, and collaboration purposes are in the background. However, it seems that the possibility of interaction for collaboration in social media by researchers is largely wasted (Meishar- Tal & Pieterse, 2017). Regarding the presence of scientists on social media, Gil- Fernández and Calderón (2021), Rodríguez-Fernández et al. (2018), and Martín et al. (2020) highlight that there is an increasing trend in the use of RRSS by researchers, but they remain hesitant to share their research results and collaborate with colleagues through these digital channels. Therefore, there seems to be an unfavourable bias against promoting scientific communication and dissemination oriented to the dialogue and participation of users who may not be associated with academia (citizens, in general). An important aspect that can interfere with university researchers’ assessment and use of social media is the level of development of their digital skills for communication and collaboration. Zaragoza and Roca Marín (2020) show that the time and dedication involved in having an active life on social media may be too demanding, and this is sometimes related to how competent they are in digital environments. This finding was reaffirmed by Finkler and Leon (2019), who pointed out that science communicators must provide content in the format generally consumed by society. However, researchers Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 243 often lack basic knowledge about how to design scientific communication materials for social media. Further, researchers’ fears about the invasion of privacy or the risks of exposure to the Internet (Gil-Fernández and Calderón, 2021) could adversely affect their active incorporation of social media. Undoubtedly, university professors are called to contribute to the scientific knowledge they produce under the protection of research centres at higher education institutions. In the era of information and knowledge with the emergence of Web 2.0 and social media, it is possible to transcend the small circles of inter-institutional contacts towards greater reach in communicating and disseminating their research results. This development has raised awareness of social media, their use and their value for communicating and disseminating scientific research (Campos-Freire et al., 2014; Simón, 2016; Fernández Bayo et al., 2019). From this point of view, this study proposes to investigate researchers’ perceptions of social media, the importance and utility they provide, and their presence and patterns of use. A literature review was conducted, and the characteristics of researchers from Spanish universities were subsequently analyzed. 3. Research method This work aims to understand the perception that researchers in academia in Spain have about the importance of social media in scientific communication and dissemination at the societal level. In addition, we delve into the understanding of the factors that would be influencing the perception the researchers considered in this work have around the topic raised. This objective will help to answer the questions that will guide the development of this work: What are the studied researchers’ perceptions and habits of use around scientific communication and dissemination through social media? What factors affect the perception of the importance of these digital scenarios? How can researchers be grouped based on their perception of the importance of social media in promoting communication and dissemination of their scientific work? Both the general objective and the questions that guide this work will be achieved from the following specific objectives (SO) will be taken: SO1: Determine the perception that researchers linked to the field of education about the importance and usefulness of social media. SO2: Determine researchers’ social media usage habits. SO3: Establish the reasons researchers use social media. SO4: Identify the sociodemographic, academic, user habits and institutional variables associated with social media. SO5: Establish the profile of the researchers according to their perceptions of the value of digital social media. The following hypotheses, based on what has been stated by authors such as Finkler and Leon (2019), Zaragoza and Roca Marín (2020), Gertrudix et al. (2021) and Gil-Fernández and Calderón (2021), among other authors mentioned in the theoretical section of this article, guide the study: H1: Despite the potential of non-academic social media for disseminating scientific knowledge, researchers make little use of social media for this purpose. 244 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) H2: The lack of digital skills, time and dedication affects the researchers’ perception of the importance of social media in scientific communication and dissemination. H3: The perception and reasons for using social media do not favour promoting communication and scientific dissemination models oriented towards dialogue and participation in scientific discussion at the societal level. The study is based on the results generated from qualitative-quantitative research carried out between September 2021 and January 2022, following the procedure indicated by Said-Hung (2021), shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 2. Methodological procedure based on Said-Hung (2021) The identification of researchers who participated in the study on which this work was based took into consideration all researchers who had published scientific content (e.g., articles, books, book chapters) related to the field of education in academic journals indexed in Scopus or Web of Science (WoS) in the past five years (2016-2020) were eligible. Of the 12,044 academic works identified, 5,314 researchers were identified, and their profiles were included in this study. From the total number of researchers identified, a simple random sample was applied, consisting of 554 researchers surveyed (e = +/- 4 and 1-α = 95%). Of these, 67 researchers (12% of the total sample) participated during the design and validation (α = 0.885) of the survey applied in this study, and a total of 487 researchers were surveyed (e = +/- 4.2 and 1-α = 95%). The final survey applied 1 and validated (α = 0.885) from a pilot test 2 was made up of a total of 37 questions, based on the work done by Said-Hung (2021), distributed in: • Questions aimed at obtaining the socio-educational and academic profile of the university professors surveyed (e.g., age, gender, educational level, public or private nature of the institution where they work, years of experience) 1 For access to Survey design please enter https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.17005750 2 The pilot report can be access https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.17005735 Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 251 • Researchers who do not use social media consider that most of these spaces are not crucial for developing their academic activities. Fig. 3. Tree analysis of researchers who consider social media to be important versus not important for scientific dissemination The tree analysis helps to identify three profiles and subgroups of researchers related to the educational field according to their perceptions of the value of digital social media. Some roles that favour a better understanding by grouping the researchers analyzed by cluster, according to the topic addressed in this work. It can be highlighted that although there is a cluster of researchers who regularly use social media to communicate and disseminate their projects, there is a subgroup that does so only at the end of their projects, which confirms H1 concerning the low use of social media by researchers. On the other hand, in the tree analysis, two other clusters are distinguished, one in which social media are used for scientific communication and dissemination only occasionally and another that considers social media irrelevant for academic activity. All this converges with H3, indicating that the perception and motives for using social media are not conducive to promoting scientific debate. Likewise, Fig. 3 shows the segmentation of researchers according to variables such as gender, frequency and motives for using social media and the importance they attach to it, favouring the understanding of the phenomena studied in this study. It stands out, for example, that among those who occasionally use social media, it is women who value these media more for communicating and disseminating their scientific projects. 252 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) 5. Discussion The results of this study demonstrate that researchers in the field of education have a medium-high perception of the importance of social media’s role in communicating and disseminating scientific knowledge from the institutes of higher learning in Spain. Low utilization of social media still characterizes the perception of researchers. These findings coincide with the results of Kilis et al. (2016), Rodríguez-Fernández et al. (2018) and Gertrudix et al. (2021). Strengthening researchers’ relationships with social media, especially generalist networks, continues to be challenging. As these authors point out, this implies improving researchers’ perceptions of social media. Above all, we need to consider the need to disseminate scientific knowledge at the social level, according to Alonso-Flores et al. (2019) and Calvo Iglesias (2021). Above all, if we want to promote a scenario of scientific communication and dissemination through social media, more capable of dealing with the transfer of knowledge generated by its members in a more transversal way, that is, not only attending to the need that researchers have to make their scientific advances known to other peers or members of their scientific communities; but also directing this knowledge towards non-academic social agents, who should also be recipients of the knowledge generated by them, in the terms indicated at the beginning of the introductory section of this work. Actions that it is logical to think that they have motivations and patterns of differentiated use, but that does not mean they cease to be part of the social responsibility that every researcher must assume, as well pointed out by Gertrudix et al. (2021) when studying the change in the dissemination model proposed from the European Horizon 2020 programs, in favour of reaching the most significant number of interest groups of the scientific results achieved by researchers. The researchers participating in this study expressed doubts and reservations about using generalist social media such as Facebook and Instagram to disseminate their research. However, there is a more significant presence of the researchers studied on Twitter, and they have a more positive perception and greater use of specialized networks such as ResearchGate, where they find individuals similar to themselves (Boudry & Durand-Barthez, 2020). This would be conditioning the approach of Science to a social environment other than academic/scientific circles (Montesi et al., 2019), leaving out non-university educational environments, for example, parents, students, managers and non-university professors. It implies that the social transfer of science, at least around topics of educational interest addressed by the researchers studied in Spain, is limited. What makes it challenging to take advantage of the knowledge generated from universities to society. Especially if we take into account that the results allow us to observe some features associated with the habit of use that the studied researchers make of social networks, which allows us to estimate a more focused pattern of use on specialized academic platforms (e.g., ResearchGate), aimed at peers or members of the scientific community, and not at other types of (non-academic) agents. The results also point to what is indicated by Meishar-Tal and Pieterse (2017) and Salinas Ibáñez and Marín Juarros (2019), a relationship of researchers with social media oriented to self-promotion and reinforcement of professional ego and the construction of networks that enable academic or professional collaboration, as one of the main reasons for the use of social media. A context similar to that mentioned by authors such as Zaragoza and Roca Marín (2020) is the lack of time and dedication required by this type of digital communication scenario and the lack of apparent “utility”; these seem to be the main reasons for nonuse. What is shown here would imply being in a scenario where the perception of the usefulness of social media and the time dedicated to their use would focus, above all, on the search for visibility and the formation of contact networks between academic peers. Although it is true, something that is important within the Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 253 academic work carried out by researchers would be leaving aside another of its primary functions, favouring access to knowledge to other social agents external to higher education institutions. And therefore, a reduction in the possibilities of social development from the social dissemination of science. What has been stated thus far would lead us to confirm Hypothesis 1, that despite the potential of non-academic social media for the social dissemination of scientific knowledge, use remains low among the researchers surveyed in this study. What limits access to scientific knowledge through social media to social actors outside the research environment. In the case of Hypothesis 2, the data show that the factors of time and dedication that the researchers say they have to use the RRSS and the perception of the training needed influence the perception of usefulness and subsequent use of social media. However, the results also point to another series of factors (i.e., gender and educational level of university professors) that should be considered when designing actions or strategies to improve the perception and use of digital communication resources from higher education institutions in Spain. Actions that should consider the profiles of researchers pointed out in this paper. The profiles could help focus their attention on researchers who do not consider social media’s role in disseminating the knowledge generated through their work as researchers to be significant enough. In this case, review the possible strategies applied by higher education institutions when encouraging the use of this type of digital communication resources by researchers interested in the study of issues associated with education, in our case. Above all, the level of researchers who do not make any use or who make occasional use of social media when disseminating the results of their research; and whose availability of time and received institutional training seem to be conditioning their perception of the usefulness and use of social media. The data shown in this study would also confirm Hypothesis 3. The importance of social media and the reasons for their usefulness expressed by researchers in the field of education in Spain does not seem to be oriented towards dialogue and citizen participation. Sharing the approaches of Bucchi (2008) and Palmer and Schibeci (2014), we could find ourselves in a communication context that favours a deficit model where the use and exploitation of digital communications seem to be more focused on specialized (academic) social media rather than generalist social media, visibility and formation of professional networks and specialized contact with other academic/scientific actors. This scenario shows the limited capacity of citizens (participation and dialogue) to engage with researchers. What makes us find ourselves in a deficient context of knowledge transfer to society, by the actors analyzed in this work, and a questioning of the role of transformers of the social context of the application of their research, by directing the dissemination of knowledge to specialized areas, whose users have a similar profile to these and less to the population that directly benefits from the knowledge generated. Especially if we take into account that the knowledge generated from higher education institutions should make use of digital communication resources, such as those considered here, to communicate and disseminate the knowledge generated in favour of improving practices (carried out by teachers) and educational environments related or unrelated to these areas (non-university education). What now does not seem to be being carried out efficiently or effectively. 254 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) 6. Conclusion The study reveals that researchers’ utilization of social networks for scientific communication and dissemination is still far from optimal. General digital platforms are less effective than specialized social platforms designed for the scientific community. Moreover, there are considerable gaps and ample room for improvement in perceived skills required to leverage these platforms and their perceived usefulness for the intended purposes. As a result, the study concludes that the current conditions within the study population and academic sector do not provide the necessary framework to ensure comprehensive scientific dissemination across the knowledge generated. Instead, the focus remains on building academic networks, inadvertently sidelining the important work of reaching a broader range of interested groups, including non-academic actors, who would benefit from researchers’ scientific findings. The practical implications of this research encompass several key aspects. Firstly, it highlights the necessity for higher education institutions to reassess and propose tailored strategies that align with the identified profiles of researchers in this project. Specifically, an institutional model should be devised to enhance training on social media usage and foster communication and dissemination policies that ensure active and consistent utilization of social media platforms. These efforts should be financially supported by research projects funded or endorsed by higher education institutions. Additionally, measures ought to be formulated to support and recognize users on generalist social media platforms in their efforts to transfer scientific knowledge. These measures should be advocated at both the individual level and within research groups, emphasising empowering and providing prominent roles for female researchers. By promoting inclusivity and gender equality, these actions can contribute to a more balanced and effective dissemination of scientific knowledge across various social media platforms. We acknowledge the inherent limitations of this study, particularly regarding the scope of the instruments used and the need to explore new methodological approaches that can provide deeper insights into the proposed topic. To address these limitations, we recognize the importance of initiating new projects, as suggested by Farias and Maia (2020), that can examine factors contributing to a better understanding of the role of women researchers within the context under discussion. Moreover, we believe it is crucial to conduct additional studies that enable the examination of these perceptions in conjunction with other potential recipients of scientific knowledge, such as nonuniversity professors. Additionally, studies with a stronger focus on contrasting the observed perceptions with the actual activities conducted by the actors analyzed on social networks would be valuable. Pursuing these lines of research will contribute to advancing new dimensions of analysis related to the topic addressed in this article. It is important to highlight that our work will serve as a valuable reference for future research endeavours associated with the mentioned lines of inquiry and other areas that emerge from engaging with our study. Researchers can draw upon our findings and insights to inform their investigations and expand upon the topics discussed. By utilizing our work as a foundation, future studies can further advance the understanding and exploration of these research directions. Author Statement The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 255 Acknowledgements This work is the result of research project No. FCT-20-15761, funded by the Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology – Ministry of Science and Innovation in 2021. This work supported the company ESPOSSIBLE in processing the analyzed data. ORCID Elias Said-Hung https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0594-5906 Ángela Martín-Gutiérrez https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9847-245X Beatriz Marcano https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2461-7577 References Aguaded, I., Civila, S., & Vizcaíno-Verdú, A. (2022). Paradigm changes and new challenges for media education: Review and science mapping (2000-2021). Profesional de la información, 31(6): e310606. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.nov.06 Alonso-Flores, F. J., Moreno Castro, C., & Serrano, A. E. (2019). Edad, género y estatus profesional de los investigadorescomo indicadores de la percepción de twitter en la difusión de la ciencia. Perspectivas de La Comunicación, 12(1), 157–184. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48672019000100157 Ayris, P., López-De-San-Román, A., Maes, K., & Labastida, I. (2018). Open science & its role in universities: A roadmap for cultural change. LERU. Bautista-Puig, N., De Filippo, D., Mauleón, E., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2019). Scientific landscape of citizen science publications: Dynamics, content and presence in social media. Publications, 7(1): 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7010012 Boeskens, L., Nusche, D., & Yurita, M. (2020). Policies to support teachers’ continuing professional learning: A conceptual framework and mapping of OECD data. OECD Education Working Papers (No. 235). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/247b7c4d-en Boudry, C., & Durand-Barthez, M. (2020). Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the university of Caen Normandy (France): A case study. PLOS ONE, 15(9): e0238583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238583 Broer, I., & Pröschel, L. (2022). Knowledge broker, trust broker, value broker: The roles of the science media center during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies in Communication Sciences, 22(1), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2022.01.3070 Brossard, D. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(S3), 14096–14101. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212744110 Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: Theories of public communication of science. In B. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (pp. 57–76). Routledge. Calvo Iglesias, E. (2021). Científicas frente al coronavirus en wikipedia. Área Abierta, 21(2), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.5209/arab.72761 Campos-Freire, F., Rivera Rogel, D., & Rodríguez Hidalgo, C. (2014). La presencia e impacto de las universidades de los países andinos en las redes sociales digitales. 256 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 69, 571–592. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS- 2014-1025 Campos-Freire, F., & Rúas-Araújo, R. (2016). Uso de las redes sociales digitales profesionales y científicas: El caso de las 3 universidades gallegas. Profesional de la información, 25(3), 431–440. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.may.13 Cassaniti, J., Mwaikambo, L., & Shore, R. (2014). Evolution of facebook groups: Informal e-learning among medical laboratory scientists in nigeria. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 6(3), 250–261. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2014.06.017 Chugh, R., & Ruhi, U. (2018). Social media in higher education: A literature review of Facebook. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 605–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9621-2 Dalyot, K., Rozenblum, Y., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2022). Engagement patterns with female and male scientists on Facebook. Public Understanding of Science, 31(7), 867–884. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221092696 De Filippo, D., Silva, P., & Borges, M. M. (2019). Caracterización de las publicaciones de españa y portugal sobre open science y análisis de su presencia en las redes sociales. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 42(2): e235. Esarey, J., & Wood, A. R. (2018). Blogs, online seminars, and social media as tools of scholarship in political science. PS: Political Science & Politics, 51(4), 811–819. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096518000070 Escobar-Ortiz, J. M., & Rincón Álvarez, A. (2018). La divulgación científica y sus modelos comunicativos: Algunas reflexiones teóricas para la enseñanza de las ciencias. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Sociales, 10(1), 135–154. https://doi.org/10.21501/22161201.3062 Farias, M. G. G., & Maia, F. C. D. A. (2020). Proposição de observatório científico para popularização da ciência. Informação & Sociedade: Estudos, 30(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.22478/ufpb.1809-4783.2020v30n3.53866 Felahi, Y., & Saqri, N. (2022). Pedagogical communication in hybrid mode in the COVID-19 pandemic era, practices in morocco and reflections. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 22(15), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v22i15.5558 Fernández Bayo, I., Menéndez, O., Fuerte, J., Milán, M., & Mecha, R. (2019). La comunidad científica ante las redes sociales: Guía de actuación para divulgar ciencia a través de ellas. Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Retrieved from https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/1334-2019-03-27- Gu%C3%ADa%20de%20actuaci%C3%B3n%20def%202019%20WEB.pdf Finkler, W., & Leon, B. (2019). The power of storytelling and video: A visual rhetoric for science communication. Journal of Science Communication, 18(05): A02. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18050202 França, M. N., Grossi, A. M., & Pacios, A. R. (2021). Mídias sociais e bibliotecas na produção científica dos estados unidos. RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, 19, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.20396/rdbci.v19i00.8661286 Fressoli, M., & De Filippo, D. (2021). Nuevos escenarios y desafíos para la ciencia abierta. Entre el optimismo y la incertidumbre. Arbor, 197(799): a586. Fuentes Cancell, D. R., Estrada Molina, O., & Delgado Yanes, N. (2021). Las redes sociales digitales: Una valoración socioeducativa. Revisión sistemática. Revista Fuentes, 1(23), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2021.v23.i1.11947 Gertrudix, M., Rajas, M., Romero-Luis, J., & Carbonell-Alcocer, A. (2021). Comunicación científica en el espacio digital. Acciones de difusión de proyectos de investigación del programa h2020. Profesional de La Información, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.ene.04 Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(2), 237–258 257 Gil-Fernández, R., & Calderón, D. (2021). The use of social media in education: A systematic review of the scientific literature. Digital Education Review, 40, 82–109. Girón Escudero, V., Cózar Gutiérrez, R., & González-Calero Somoza, J. A. (2019). Análisis de la autopercepción sobre el nivel de competencia digital docente en la formación inicial de maestros/as.: Analysis of self-perception on the level of teachers’ digital competence in teachers training. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación Del Profesorado, 22(3), 193–218. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.373421 Guenther, L., & Joubert, M. (2021). Novel interfaces in science communication: Comparing journalistic and social media uptake of articles published by the conversation africa. Public Understanding of Science, 30(8), 1041–1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625211019312 Güneri, F. D., Forestier, F. B. E., Forestier, R. J., Karaarslan, F., & Odabaşi, E. (2022). YouTube as a source of information for water treatments. International Journal of Biometeorology, 66(4), 781–789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-021-02236-4 Hargittai, E., Füchslin, T., & Schäfer, M. (2018). How do young adults engage with science and research on social media? Some preliminary findings and an agenda for future research. Social Media + Society. 4(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118797720 Huang, J., Gates, A. J., Sinatra, R., & Barabási, A.-L. (2020). Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 4609–4616. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1914221117 Işik, D., & Gökkurt Demi rtel, Ö. (2021). Akademisyenlerin akademik sosyal ağlara yönelik tutumlari: Ankara üniversitesi örneği. Turk Kutuphaneciligi - Turkish Librarianship, 35(2), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.24146/tk.873536 Kilis, S., Gülbahar, Y., & Rapp, C. (2016). Exploration of teaching preferences of instructors’use of social media. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 19(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1515/eurodl-2016-0001 Lalangui, M., Ramón, M., & Espinoza, D. (2017). Formación continua en la formación docente. Revista Conrado, 13(58), 30–35. Linek, S. B., Jäschke, R., & Hoffmann, C. (2018). Women prefer reciprocity: Genderrelated differences in academic networking on twitter. In Proceedings of the 11th annual international conference of education, research and innovation (ICERI 2018). Zbw leibniz information centre for economics, Germany (pp. 4759–4767). Mandiá-Rubal, S., López-Ornelas, M., & Túñez-López, J. M. (2019). La implantación de internet en la gestión de perfiles profesionales en investigación científica. Texto Livre: Linguagem e Tecnologia, 12(3), 144–167. https://doi.org/10.17851/1983- 3652.12.3.144-167 Martín, D., Ferrá, M., & Batán, J. (2020). Scientific collaboration and communication in academic social media. Transformación, 16(1), 121–136. Meishar-Tal, H., & Pieterse, E. (2017). Why do academics use academic social networking sites? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i1.2643 Miller, A., & Heiland, S. (2021). #ProtectNature—How characteristics of nature conservation posts impact user engagement on facebook and twitter. Sustainability, 13(22): 12768. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212768 Mirowski, P. (2018). The future(s) of open science. Social Studies of Science, 48(2), 171– 203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312718772086 Montesi, M., Villaseñor Rodríguez, I., & Bittencourt Dos Santos, F. (2019). Presencia, actividad, visibilidad e interdisciplinariedad del profesorado universitario de documentación en los medios sociales: Una perspectiva de género. Revista Española 258 E. Said-Hung et al. (2024) de Documentación Científica, 42(4): e246. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2019.4.1640 Ostermaier‐Grabow, A., & Linek, S. B. (2019). Communication and self‐presentation behavior on academic social networking sites: An exploratory case study on profiles and discussion threads on ResearchGate. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(10), 1153–1164. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24186 Palmer, S. E., & Schibeci, R. A. (2014). What conceptions of science communication are espoused by science research funding bodies? Public Understanding of Science, 23(5), 511–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662512455295 Pimmer, C., Lee, A., & Mwaikambo, L. (2018). Mobile instant messaging: New knowledge tools in global health? Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 10(3), 334–349. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2018.10.019 Rodríguez-Fernández, M.-M., Sánchez Amboage, E., & Martínez-Fernández, V.-A. (2018). Utilización, conocimiento y valoración de redes sociales digitales científicas en las universidades gallegas. El Profesional de La Información, 27(5), 1097–1107. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.sep.13 Roig-Vila, R., Mondéjar, L., & Lledó, G. L. (2016). Scientific social networtks. The social web at the service of research. IJERI: International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 5, 170–183. Said-Hung, E. (2021). Memoria Técnica del proyecto Comsciencia. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.15219648 Salinas Ibáñez, J., & Marín Juarros, V. I. (2019). Metasíntesis cualitativa sobre colaboración científica e identidad digital académica en redes sociales. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 22(2), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.22.2.23238 Simón, J. E. (2016). University communication offices and social media: Study of the use of social media by andalusian public universities. Universidad de Almería. Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology. (2020). Survey of social perception of Science and technology in Spain. Retrieved from https://www.fecyt.es/es/noticia/encuestas-de-percepcion-social-de-la-ciencia-y-la- tecnologia-en-espana Striewski, S., Zagovora, O., & Peters, I. (2022). Scientific discourse on YouTube: Motivations for citing research in comments. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.754 Vizcaíno-Verdú, A., De-Casas-Moreno, P., & Contreras-Pulido, P. (2020). Scientific dissemination on YouTube and its reliability for university professors. Educación XX1, 23(2), 283–306. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.25750 Wellcome. (2021). Wellcome global monitor 2020: Covid-19. Retrieved from https://wellcome.org/reports/wellcome-global-monitor-covid-19/2020 Wong, P. P. Y., Wong, G. W. C., Techanamurthy, U., Mohamad, W. S. B., Febriana, A., & Chong, J. C. M. (2022). Using social mobile learning to stimulate idea generation for collective intelligence among higher education students. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 14(2), 150–169. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2022.14.009 Zaragoza, J., & Roca Marín, D. (2020). The youtuber movement in Spanish scientific dissemination. Revista Prisma Social, 1(31), 212–238. Zhang, K., & Gao, F. (2014). Social media for informal science learning in China: A case study. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 6(3), 262–280. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2014.06.018