Fig 1.
Research framework outlining the study design/methodology.
Fig 2.
Average number of social media posts per week by individuals (IND) and eNGOs (ORG), July 30-August 26, 2018.
Colours indicate the platform distribution of Twitter posts (TRPs), Instagram stories (IGSs), and Instagram posts (IGPs).
Fig 3.
Proportion of social media posts by individuals and eNGOs containing A) images, and B) videos/GIFs, July 30-August 26, 2018. Colours indicate the relative proportion of posts with images or videos/GIFs in the TRPs, IGSs, and IGPs.
Table 1.
Average number of words and average percentage of first person pronouns per post caption, for the individuals and eNGOs, July 30-August 26, 2018.
Fig 4.
Proportion of social media posts by individuals and eNGOs containing selfies, July 30-August 26, 2018.
Colours indicate relative proportion of posts with selfies in the TRPs, IGSs, and IGPs.
Fig 5.
Proportion of video posts by individuals and eNGOs containing selfie-style audio (V), background audio (B), music (M), and no audio (N), July 30-August 26, 2018.
*Two or no videos posted (IND2 and ORG1).
Fig 6.
Proportion of off-topic posts by individuals and eNGOs, July 30-August 26, 2018.
Colours indicate the relative proportion of off-topic posts in the TRPs, IGSs, and IGPs.
Fig 7.
Average proportion of comments responded to per social media post by individuals and eNGOs, July 30-August 26, 2018.
Colours indicate the relative proportion of comments responded to on TRPs and IGPs. Numbers on top of bars indicate the total number of comments responded to during the study period.
Table 2.
Average number of comments per post, number of words per comment, number of unique conversationalists engaged, percentage of conversationalists who interacted directly with the communicator, and percentage of survey participants who identified as scientists on social media, for the individuals and eNGOs, July 30-August 26, 2018.
Table 3.
Participant age, gender, level of education, and scientific community association (“n” = the number who responded to each demographic question).
Table 4.
Participants’ most preferred platform (n = the number who stated their most preferred platform).
Table 5.
Participants’ reasons for using Twitter, Instagram, and for following/responding to the communicators (n = number of people who provided an open text response).
Fig 8.
Representation of formal vs. interpersonal communication strategies on social media.
Formal strategies are not sufficient to establish a relationship between audience and communicator, resulting solely in a transmission pathway. Interpersonal strategies act as enablers to information flow, resulting in communicator-audience relationships, which promote two-way conversations sustained over time.