How is public discussion as reflected in WeChat articles different from scholarly research in China? An empirical study of metaverse

Yang Zhang, Yinghua Xie, Longfei Li, Yian Liang and Houqiang Yu ()
Additional contact information
Yang Zhang: Sun Yat-Sen University
Yinghua Xie: Sun Yat-Sen University
Longfei Li: Wuhan University
Yian Liang: Sun Yat-Sen University
Houqiang Yu: Sun Yat-Sen University

Scientometrics, 2024, vol. 129, issue 1, No 16, 473-495

Abstract: Abstract Social media platforms do not blur the difference in information preferences between the general public and researchers when faced with the same heated events. This study aims to investigate the consistency between the public focus conveyed by WeChat articles and the scholarly focus reflected by CNKI papers in China, and to reveal the underlying interaction between researchers and the public. Metaverse is used as a case study. Based on articles mentioning metaverse in WeChat and CNKI, the dominant accounts and disciplines, topics discussed and studied, and sentiments related to metaverse are explored. Furthermore, WeChat articles mentioning scholarly outputs are identified to map the interaction between the public and researchers. Empirical analysis reveals that the first articles mentioning metaverse in both datasets predate the rebranding of Facebook. WeChat official accounts from the technology and finance industries post more metaverse-related articles, while researchers from journalism and information management are the main forces in academia. Both the public and academia discuss the impact of metaverse on the economy, politics, and social relations, the public also discusses the infrastructure, while academia ponders metaverse from the philosophical perspective, mass communication, and education. 60% of academic articles are mentioned by WeChat. The operators of WeChat official accounts, the public, and scholars express different sentiments. The theoretical significance lies in combining social media studies of science with bibliometric analysis. Practically, the public can take advantage to clarify the confusion related to metaverse. For policymakers, we provide scientific evidence to look for directions in the metaverse development.

Keywords: Social media studies of science; Metaverse; Science-society interaction; Altmetrics; WeChat; CNKI (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04892-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04892-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04892-2

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().