CSSC Brief · In press
How social media shapes what we expect from scientists
Based on Understanding How Exposure to Science Content on Social Media Shapes Normative Expectations of Scientists’ Communication: A Social Media Affordances Perspective, forthcoming in Public Understanding of Science.
The short version
The more science people saw on social media, the more they expected scientists to speak up on politics, be warm and relatable, show their expertise, and engage with the public. And those who expected scientists to show competence and speak up politically trusted them more.
What we did
Scroll through TikTok, Instagram, or X and you might see a scientist cracking jokes, answering questions in the comments, or weighing in on politics. Not long ago, most people saw scientists only through the news, if at all: in 2021, 72% of Americans couldn’t name a single living scientist. Social media makes scientists, and science content of all kinds, far more visible. So we wondered: does all that scrolling change what people think scientists should do online? And do those expectations matter for whether people trust scientists?
We surveyed 878 U.S. social media users twice, about a month apart, in February and March 2025. The first time, we asked how often they came across different kinds of science content on social media, from news about new discoveries to posts urging political action. The second time, we asked what they expect from scientists online: speaking up on political issues, being warm and relatable (like using humor or a friendly tone), showing competence (like using precise language and sticking to the evidence), and engaging with the public (like replying to comments and answering questions). We also asked how much they trust scientists, and how much they think people and governments should rely on scientists’ guidance.
What we found
- The more science people saw, the more they expected of scientists. People who came across more science content on social media expected scientists to do more of all four: speak up on political issues, be warm and relatable, show their competence, and engage with the public.
- Seeing more science closed a partisan gap on warmth. Among people who saw little science content, liberals expected more warmth from scientists than conservatives did. Among people who saw a lot, that gap disappeared.
- Different kinds of content shaped different expectations. Seeing advocacy posts was linked to expecting more political expression and warmth from scientists. Seeing provocative content, like polarizing or misleading posts, was linked to expecting less political expression but more public engagement.
- Two expectations went hand in hand with trust. People who expected scientists to show competence and to speak up on politics trusted scientists more and were more willing to rely on their guidance. Expecting warmth or public engagement wasn’t linked to trust.
Why it matters
What counts as “normal” for scientists online isn’t set only by universities or professional societies; it’s also shaped by what audiences see in their feeds. For scientists, warmth, like humor, personal stories, or a casual tone, may offer a way to connect with more skeptical audiences, including conservatives. And people who expect scientists to speak up on political issues tend to trust them more, not less. Platforms can help, too, by making credible scientists easier to find without forcing them to chase virality. Because this is a survey, it shows associations rather than cause and effect, but it suggests that everyday scrolling may be quietly reshaping what people expect from scientists, and whom they trust.
Cite the paper
Zhang, A. L. (in press). Understanding how exposure to science content on social media shapes normative expectations of scientists’ communication: A social media affordances perspective. Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625261491265