ArticlePloS one2026
Identity interweaving, act boundaries, illusion and reality interweaving: A study of visual narratives of scientists and citizen scientists through AI.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming human-computer interaction, reshaping communication methods and altering public perceptions of science. This shift challenges traditional scientific authority, especially as citizen science gains prominence. While research on scientific rhetoric has focused on qualitative analyses in media, little attention has been given to how AI influences visual rhetorical narratives in science. This study employs computer visual analysis and quantitative rhetorical difference analysis to explore the intersection of AI and science through Visual Narrative Theory.It investigates the rhetorical differences between scientists and citizen scientists across three dimensions: narrate, act, and resonate. Findings reveal that both groups embody a mixed rhetoric of authority and proximity in the narrative dimension. In the act dimension, AI depicts scientists in professional roles while showing citizen scientists in practical roles, portraying scientists as "flowers in the greenhouse". In the resonate dimension, scientists' narratives often feature surreal elements, while citizen scientists present more everyday narratives.This analysis, utilizing computer vision and quantitative methods, offers a fresh perspective on the image of science in the AI era and suggests strategies for enhancing science communication and building trust in science using generative AI.
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.