Social networks enable anyone to publish potentially boundless amounts of
information. However, such information is also highly prone to creating
and/or diffusing mistakes and misunderstandings in scientific issues. In 2013
we produced a website (
Science communication is a dissemination of scientific knowledge to the general public, not involving formal educational activities. The central objective of science communication is producing one or more of the following responses (using the vowel analogy): awareness, enjoyment, interest, opinion, understanding (Burns et al., 2003). Essential to this purpose is the use of a language accessible to an audience with extremely diverse educational and cultural backgrounds.
The primary vehicle of scientific information is peer-reviewed periodicals, generally focused on specific research areas and directed at well-circumscribed, specialized audiences. Primary scientific literature, therefore, is not directly accessible to the general public, and this tends to create a gap between the scientific community and wider society. Science magazines are a major source of scientific information for the general public, but their audience is generally restricted to people with a special interest in scientific issues.
A greater involvement of researchers in science dissemination, as well as the introduction of communication training in scientific degree courses, has been advocated on several occasions (see, for example, Brownell et al., 2013; Greenwood and Riordan, 2001; Leshner, 2003). Indeed, a survey by the European Commission (2007) has shown that European citizens consider scientists to be preferable to journalists as a source of information on scientific issues. In Italy, science communication is mainly performed by specialized journalists, and only recently (Italian Ministerial Decree, D.M., n. 47, 2013) scientific and cultural dissemination has been officially included among third-mission activities of universities.
The world wide web has dramatically increased science visibility to the general public (Ynalvez et al., 2010); indeed, even popular science magazines have now opened websites. The media platforms are changing web users' way of interacting with news, events (Hermida et al., 2012; Kwak et al., 2010) and scientific information (Rigutto, 2015). Despite stimulating attention to science, the web does not foster scientific knowledge among the general public as much as one might expect, because not infrequently the information provided is unclear, incomplete or even utterly wrong; hence, it could cause a misunderstanding. A particularly effective example of a misunderstanding is the well-known case of Jade Helm 15, a simple military exercise widely perceived by the general public as an imminent threat of civil war in the USA (Zollo et al., 2015a). Thanks to Web 2.0 and social networks, all users have the possibility to create and share information (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010), but not all are able to assess the reliability of the source. Homogeneous user communities have arisen with well-focused finalities but with scarce mutual interaction (Zollo et al., 2015b). Not only does this restrain the flow of information between web user communities but it also feeds misinformation, an outcome recognized as a major threat to society by the World Economic Forum (Howell, 2013). As Lodhia (2012) emphasized, a major benefit from Web 2.0 to the dissemination of scientific information is in enabling the users to get information from researchers and interact with them, the latter being a key factor of effectiveness in communication. Bowman et al. (2015) highlighted the importance of researchers being present on social media and using it for outreaching and science dissemination in addition to contacting other scientists. A particularly important function of scientific communication is in environmental protection (Claussen et al., 2013) and prevision and/or prevention of natural disasters. Although essential for fostering responsible social behaviours towards natural resources and natural hazards, information on these issues among the general public is generally insufficient.
The University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli (known as the Second
University of Naples, SUN, from 1992 to 2016) is a state university established in Campania
(southern Italy), an area highly exposed to natural risk including seismic
(Italian Official Gazette, G.U., n. 108, 2006)
and volcanic (Lirer et al., 2010)
hazard, and also affected by well-known problems of pollution and waste
mismanagement (Senior and Mazza, 2004). In 2013, we developed a website
called SUstaiNability (
The SUstaiNability website, referred to as “the website” hereafter (Fig. 1), was
hosted in the institutional internet domain of the university (
Map of the website (
Titles of website articles (in parenthesis, corresponding Italian titles reported on the website), thematic areas, reference researchers, publication dates (dd/mm/yyyy), identification numbers of website articles and references of original papers.
Web article template: (1) peer-reviewed journal web page, (2) reference
researcher email, (3) reference researcher page on IRIS
(
Overall, 22 articles divided into 11 thematic areas and one in-depth section (Table 1 and Fig. 1) were published on the website in January–February 2013 (Table 1). For each thematic area we reviewed all relevant publications available at the time; hence the number of articles was not the same for all areas. Subsequently, two other articles were published but these were not used for the present study.
Website articles have been shared on the Facebook page (
Tools used for the website and social network analysis and data
collected during the monitoring period (the
In order to assess the relative performance of the three platforms (website,
Facebook and Twitter), we calculated the mean values and standard deviations of total
visualizations, appreciations or shares obtained for each article. Moreover,
to compare the performance of different thematic areas (as reported in
Table 1), we calculated the mean values of visualizations, appreciations or
shares for each thematic area and each platform. The data were analysed by a
Kolmogorov–Smirnov normality test (SigmaPlot 12), and, where appropriate,
normalized by log
Article shares, assumed to be an indication of positive judgment, were analysed by principal component analysis (PCA, by SYN-TAX 5.0) applied to a matrix of 22 columns, one for each article, and 3 lines (for shares through each platform). The correlations between the axes of the biplot derived from PCA and possible regulating factors were assayed by Pearson coefficient (SigmaPlot 12).
Geographical information from Facebook and Twitter showed that 95 and
77 % of users reached by SUstaiNability posts or tweet, respectively, were
resident in Italy. From Facebook insights, which provides detailed
geographical and demographical data, we established that users were mainly
from Campania (71 %), essentially from Naples (50 %) and Caserta
(40 %) districts, with a remarkable majority of women (61 %
During the observation period, 62 491 users (on average 1042 day
Significantly higher visualizations and appreciations (mean and total) were recorded for Facebook compared to the other two platforms (Fig. 3a, b). This is consistent with the analysis by Bowman et al. (2015), reporting that an average of 71 % of social media users in the United States are on Facebook, followed by LinkedIn (22 %), Twitter (19 %) and Instagram (17 %). Facebook visualizations and appreciations were respectively 16 and 0.2 % of the users reached by this platform. By contrast, the highest shares were obtained through the website (Fig. 3c). On the website page, social media share buttons are located beneath the text; hence, presumably the website users shared the article after reading it. Of the two social networks considered, a higher number of shares was recorded for Facebook (Fig. 3c).
Mean values (and standard deviations) of visualizations
When we compared articles for visualizations (Fig. 4a), appreciations
(Fig. 4b) and shares (Fig. 4c), we observed a pronounced diversity not only
among the social media (as already shown in Fig. 3), but also among articles
within the same thematic area (expressed by high standard deviations, limited
to thematic areas containing several articles). This suggests that the
thematic area was not the only factor affecting the article performance. A
significant variability in visualizations (Fig. 4a) and appreciations
(Fig. 4b) among thematic areas was recorded only for Twitter. Twitter users
mainly visualized the in-depth article (
Mean values (and standard deviations) of
visualizations
The data obtained suggest that Campania's citizens are more worried about pollution events and related problems than natural hazards. This finding is in line with results by Ricci et al. (2013), reporting that the population living in Naples, i.e. very close to the critical volcanic area of Campi Flegrei, indicated a lack of public services, heavy traffic, waste, organized crime, poor social life and unemployment as their main problems, whereas only 0.5 % of the respondents mentioned volcanoes and 1.7 % earthquakes.
Principal component analysis (PCA) applied to shares of each article on the website, Facebook and Twitter (identification number of each article as in Table 1). The percentage of variance explained by each axis is reported in parenthesis. Articles clustering in distinct areas of the biplot are enclosed in circles of different colours.
PCA applied to shares showed that the first
two axes of the biplot accounted for the 78.43 % of variance (44.25 %
axis 1; 34.18 % axis 2; Fig. 5). In the biplot, the articles clustered in
distinct groups, circled with different colours in Fig. 5. The article in
the yellow circle was published first, the articles in the blue circle last
(Table 1). Axis 1 was negatively correlated with publication order (
The articles in blue circle had the highest number of undefined specialized
terms, whereas those in the grey circle had the lowest. Axis 1 of the biplot
was negatively correlated with the number of specialized terms not defined in
the text or without links (
Comparison between the number of likes on the Facebook page and followers on Twitter during the monitored period. Vertical lines indicate the dates of publication (dd-mm-yyyy) of the articles on the website and social media (the red line marks the last publication date).
During the monitoring period, we also registered the number of subscriptions (likes or followers) on the social media page and account (Fig. 6). Overall, the SUstaNability page on Facebook had 281 subscribed users, while the Twitter account had 129 followers, confirming Facebook as the most effective medium. As shown in Fig. 6, subscriptions on Facebook increased during article publication, but they did not change further after publication of the last article. In line with the observed correlation of axis 1 of the PCA biplot with the publication order, this supports the conclusion that a continuous updating of web pages helps to maintain users' interest. However, Twitter followers increased regularly throughout the monitored period.
In agreement with conclusions by other authors (Lodhia, 2012; Bowman et al., 2015), our results confirm that the web and social media are effective channels for scientific dissemination. However, whereas it is important that researchers directly contribute to the transfer of knowledge, it is also essential to make an effort on their side to produce clear and informative messages. This requires a major rethinking of the current approach, as the social media used by researchers to share their products (LinkedIn, ResearchGate, Accademia.edu) does not appear to make any effort to facilitate access to the general public.
The present analysis confirms the effectivity of
The SUstaiNability audience was mainly from the Campania region and showed a strong interest in pollution issues but was relatively unconcerned with natural hazard. This is probably an effect of the great emphasis recently given by local and national media to pollution events and waste mismanagement problems in the area. However, Campania is also a territory strongly exposed to natural hazard; hence, the low level of interest expressed by citizens in this regard reflects poor information. This study calls for dissemination programmes to urgently improve knowledge, avoid misinformation and encourage responsible behaviour among Campania's citizens.
Our results suggest that, although social networks are useful for reaching web users and sharing news, websites are especially effective as a source of information on specific issues. Our analysis of data indicates that regularly updating scientific websites can be used to draw the attention of users. Moreover, research reports must maintain a delicate balance between correctness and clarity, hence omitting unnecessary details without missing essential points, and providing explanations wherever appropriate. Social media pages and accounts administered by academics could help the general audience to get reliable scientific information and would help researchers to promote their work outside the scientific community.
Data used in this article have not been deposited to respect the privacy of users. Therefore, supplementary materials (provided separately) only include numerical data. On the contrary, demographic and geographical information on users cannot be made available because it involves people who are required to remain anonymous.
TG designed the website, administered the social media pages/account, wrote the first draft of website articles and collected data. FAR supervised the website contents. MM provided technical support for website maintenance. TG and FAR analysed the data and prepared the manuscript. RL revised the manuscript.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article is part of the special issue “Effective Science Communication and Education in Hydrology and Natural Hazards (NHESS/HESS inter-journal SI)”. It is not associated with a conference.
The authors are very grateful to Giovanna Battipaglia, Simona Castaldi, Elio Coppola, Aurora Daniele, Rosaria D'Ascoli, Mario De Stefano, Antonio D'Onofrio, Livio Gianfrani, Michele Grieco, Pasquale Iovino, Eugenio Lippiello, Carmine Lubritto, Maria Laura Mastellone, Lidia Muscariello, Daniela Ruberti, Sandro Strumia, Dario Tedesco, Filippo Terrasi, Alessandro Usiello for their reviews of the website articles. Edited by: Samuel Illingworth Reviewed by: Rosa Vicari and one anonymous referee