Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Funding

The research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 72274227), Humanity and Social Science Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (22YJA870016) and National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 20BTQ085).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Houqiang Yu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Y., Xie, Y., Li, L. et al. How is public discussion as reflected in WeChat articles different from scholarly research in China? An empirical study of metaverse. Scientometrics 129, 473–495 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04892-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04892-2

Keywords

Navigation