ArticleNature human behaviour2025
Political expression of academics on Twitter.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Improving science literacy in the newsroom: Experimental evidence.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Academics play a vital role in the generation and dissemination of knowledge, ideas and narratives. Social media provide new, more direct ways of science communication. Yet, since not all academics engage with social media, the sample that does so may have an outsized influence on shaping public perceptions of academia through the set topics they engage with and their style and tone of communication. We describe patterns in academics' expression online using an international dataset covering nearly 100,000 scholars linking their Twitter content to academic records. We document large and systematic variation in politically salient academic expression concerning climate action, cultural and economic concepts. We show that US academics often diverge from the US Twitter population at large in topic focus and style, although academics are not necessarily more extreme in their beliefs. Future work should examine potential impacts on public trust and the reasons why academics express themselves politically on social media.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.