Latest “Pulse Check” Results Reveal Diverse Approaches to Social Media

The latest Pulse Check report on Social Media in Scholarly Communications is now available! See which platforms organizations across the scholarly communications ecosystem use and how often, the goals driving that use, how effectiveness is assessed, and how social media activity has evolved in recent years. It also asked respondents to reflect more broadly on social media’s impact on scholarly communication itself.

Read the key takeaways on The Scholarly Kitchen and dive deeper with the full report on the SSP website.

Key Findings

• LinkedIn dominates, but the platform landscape is diversifying. LinkedIn is the clear professional default, followed by Facebook, Bluesky, and Instagram.
• Visibility and dissemination are the dominant goals. Organizations primarily use social media for brand visibility, awareness, and dissemination of research.
• Social media is seen as effective for reach, less so for results. Respondents rate social media highly for brand awareness and content dissemination, but confidence drops considerably for activities tied to tangible outcomes.
• Measurement practices are uneven. Engagement metrics, including likes, shares, and comments, dominate evaluation tactics, while 21% of organizations report no formal measurement at all.
• Organic social media is growing; paid remains a niche tactic. More than half of respondents report increased organic social media activity over the past two to three years.
• The community sees social media as a double-edged tool. Respondents broadly credit social media with expanding the reach and visibility of research, supporting community building, and facilitating scholarly discourse. At the same time, significant majorities express concern about its contribution to misinformation, blurring of evidence and opinion, and increased exposure to harassment.

Pulse Check polls consist of 5–6 focused questions, along with optional demographic information to enable richer segmentation and understanding of trends.

By regularly “taking the temperature” of our community, Pulse Check helps track emerging challenges, opportunities, policy impacts, and shifting priorities affecting scholarly publishing organizations. Findings will support data-informed decision-making and provide a clearer picture of how our community is evolving.

If you have a suggestion for future Pulse Check Polls, send your ideas to info@sspnet.org.