Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41693729›Full record

ArticleHumanities & social sciences communications2026

Addressing social media platforms' influence on academic research.

Raffael Heiss, Isabelle Freiling

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Humanities & social sciences communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Raffael HeissManagement Center Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Isabelle FreilingUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social media platforms play a central role in shaping today's information ecosystem, yet access to both their internal data and even publicly visible content remains tightly restricted for academic researchers. This stands in sharp contrast to other industries, such as food and pharmaceuticals, where researchers can independently study product ingredients and effects. As a result, academic research on social media faces an unprecedented dependency on industry-controlled data, increasing the risk of bias and potentially distorting the evidence needed for effective regulation and policymaking. Drawing on research from other disciplines, we examine how industry influence operates and how researchers' reliance on platforms for data may amplify industry influence. We identify four challenges in collaborations between researchers and social media platforms: restricted data access, selective funding, hard-to-detect influence, and institutional entanglements. These challenges risk undermining the independence and transparency of research in a field of growing societal relevance. Addressing these challenges requires policymakers to regulate data access, as illustrated by the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA), which mandates data access for vetted researchers while safeguarding user privacy. In addition, new independent funding mechanisms could help ensure that research agendas remain free from platform interests. In parallel, the social science community must adopt stronger ethical standards and invest in "research on research" to detect and mitigate potential biases in policy-relevant research. With a dual approach-policy reforms and critical academic debates-we can ensure that research on social media platforms serves the public interest rather than platform priorities.

Indexed as

Cultural and media studiesScience, technology and society

Identifiers

PMID41693729
PMCPMC12904786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.