Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/336443 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Series/Report no.: 
WZB Discussion Paper No. SP II 2025-601
Publisher: 
Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin
Abstract: 
As social media becomes prominent within academia, we examine its reputational costs for academics. Analyzing Twitter posts from 98,000 scientists (2016-22), we uncover substantial political expression. Online experiments with 4,000 U.S. respondents and 135 journalists, rating synthetic academic profiles with different political affiliations, reveal that politically neutral scientists are seen as the most credible. Strikingly, political expressions result in monotonic penalties: Stronger posts more greatly reduce the perceived credibility of scientists and their research and audience engagement, particularly among oppositely aligned respondents. Two surveys with scientists highlight their awareness of penalties, their perceived benefits, and a consensus on limiting political expression outside their expertise.
Subjects: 
Twitter
Scientists' Credibility
Polarization
Online Experiment
JEL: 
C93
D72
D83
I23
Z10
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.