Clinical neurophysiology social media engagement differs between facebook and twitter users

Tasnim, Tuhfatul Iwaki Hirotaka Asano Eishi

Introduction. In an age where social media is prevalent and long hours are spent browsing through the internet, it is crucial to understand audience engagement. Two of the most common platforms used worldwide are Twitter and Facebook. Both have provided a unique opportunity for the science world;it broadened the horizons for spreading information on current endeavors in the research world. Clinical Neurophysiology and Clinical Neurophysiology Practice, the Official Journals of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, opened the Twitter and Facebook pages on April 1, 2020. We determined what factors would alter users' engagement. Methods. We employed a multivariate regression analysis. The tested predictor variables included 'days elapsed since the opening (range: 1–100)', 'posting during weekend', 'introduction of a 2020 article', 'author interview', 'inclusion of guidelines or review article', 'COVID19-related information', 'number of hashtags', 'number of attachments', 'presence of colored attachment', and 'attachment of movie'. The dependent variable was the proportion of engaged users, defined as the number of link clicks divided by users who saw the post. Results. Posts including author interviews (p < 0.001) and those introducing guidelines/review articles (p = 0.005) independently increased the proportion of engaged Facebook users. Conversely, posts including a larger number of colored attachments (p < 0.001) and those introducing COVID19-related articles (p = 0.007) independently increased the proportion of engaged Twitter users. Conclusion. Different types of posts attracted Facebook and Twitter users. Facebook users were specifically engaged with interview-based posts. Facebook users might be willing to read through lengthy posts to understand the authors' stories behind the study. In contrast, Twitter users might want to absorb essential information with a glance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Clinical Neurophysiology is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)