Expert credibility on social media : an exploratory study of authorial projection by experts in physiotherapy on X/Twitter

Ana E. Sancho-Ortiz

doi:10.18172/jes.7199

Authors

Ana E. Sancho-Ortiz Universidad de Zaragoza https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5966-8038

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18172/jes.7199

Keywords:

Credibility, Expert identity, Interpersonal positioning, Science communication, Stance, X/Twitter

Abstract

Microblogging has become established as a space for science communication (Büchi, 2017) in which experts’ active involvement in digital dissemination has led to the emergence of new forms of professional self-presentation (Pascual et al., 2023). In light of this, this paper explores the discursive construction of professional credibility as central to expert identity on X/Twitter. To this end, NVivo 14 was employed to quantitatively and qualitatively analyse 100 posts from four physiotherapy experts, focusing on the use of stance markers (Hyland, 2005b) and qualitatively annotating patterns of scientific verbalisations. Despite certain shared systematicity as regards emotional markers across users, findings reveal significant variability in the frequency of use and combination of stance markers. Specifically, the results indicate a strategic of—inclusive or exclusive—self-mentions, positively loaded emotional markers, and lexical technicality, based on users’ respective self-presentations as an accessible knowledge-provider, a committed expert, a branded individual, and a transparent knowledge commentator.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alasfour, M., Lajami, Z., & Algashami, A. (2025). Perceived impact of physiotherapy-related debates on the social platform “X” on physiotherapists’ professional development and knowledge acquisition: A cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Education, 25, 155. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06760-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06760-4

Baker, S. A. & Rojek, C. (2020). Lifestyle gurus: Constructing authority and influence online. Polity Press.

Baker, S. A. (2022). Wellness culture. How the wellness movement has been used to empower, profit and misinform. Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781802624656 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/9781802624656

Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; V. W. McGee, Trans.). University of Texas Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7560/720466

Bondi, M. (2022). Dialogicity in individual and institutional scientific blogs. Publications, 10(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10010009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10010009

boyd, D. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community and Culture on Social Network Sites (47-66). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203876527-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203876527-8

boyd, D., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x

Bromme, R., & Jucks, R. (2018). Discourse and expertise: The challenge of mutual understanding between experts and laypeople. In M. F. Schober, D. N. Rapp, & M. A. Britt (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse processes (pp. 222-246). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687384-13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687384-13

Bucchi, M. & Trench, B. (2016). Science communication and science in society: A conceptual review in ten keywords. Tecnoscienza: Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies 7(2), 151-168. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2038-3460/17333

Büchi, M. (2017). Microblogging as an extension of science reporting. Public Understanding of Science, 26(8), 953-968. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516657794 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516657794

Campbell, L., Quicke, J., Stevenson, K., Paskins, Z., Dziedzic, K., & Swaithes, L. (2024). Using Twitter (X) to Mobilize Knowledge for First Contact Physiotherapists: Qualitative Study. Journal of medical Internet research, 26, e55680. https://doi.org/10.2196/55680 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/55680

Cherry, R. (1988). Ethos versus persona: Self-representation in written discourse. Written Communication, 5(3), 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088388005003001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088388005003001

Côté I. M., & Darling E. S. (2018). Scientists on Twitter: Preaching to the choir or singing from the rooftops? FACETS, 3, 682-694. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2018-0002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2018-0002

Dayter, D. (2016). Discursive self in microblogging. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.260 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.260

Ditlevsen, M. G., & Kastberg, P. (2011). Editors' preface. Fachsprache: International Journal of Specialized Communication, 33(3-4), 134-136.

Engberg, J. (2023). Between infotainment and citizen science: Degrees of intended non-expert participation through knowledge communication. In R. Plo-Alastrué & I. Corona (Eds.), Digital scientific communication: Identity and visibility in research dissemination (pp. 149-170). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38207-9_7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38207-9_7

Fernandes, M. M., Mello, E. R., Fanfa, M. S., Silveira, A. C., Peixoto, M. L., Melchior, A. C. P., Correa, V. A., de Oliveira, V. F., Aliano, G. B., Dangui, A. J. M., Wageck, B., & Nunes, G. S. (2026). Social media as a bridge between science and practice? Physiotherapists' perceptions from a qualitative study. Clinical Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155251413198 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155251413198

Gero, K. I., Liu, V., Huang, S., Lee, J., & Chilton, L. B. (2021). What makes tweetorials tick: How experts communicate complex topics on Twitter. Proceedings of the ACM on Human‑Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW2). https://doi.org/10.1145/3479566 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3479566

Gilpin, D. R. (2011). Working the Twittersphere: Microblogging as professional identity construction. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites (pp. 232-250). Routledge.

Hyland, K. & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25, 156-177. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156

Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes 20(3), 207-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00012-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00012-0

Hyland, K. (2002). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal, 56(4), 351-358. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.4.351 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.4.351

Hyland, K. (2003). Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 251-259. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10204 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10204

Hyland, K. (2005a). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365

Hyland, K. (2005b). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2010). Community and individuality: Performing identity in applied linguistics. Written Communication, 27(2), 159-188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088309357846 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088309357846

Hyland, K. (2011). The presentation of self in scholarly life: Identity and marginalization in academic homepages. English for Specific Purposes, 30, 286-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.04.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.04.004

Hyland, K. (2012). Individuality or conformity? Identity in personal and university academic homepages. Computers and Composition, 29, 309-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2012.10.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2012.10.002

Ivanić, R. (1997). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.5

Kupper, F., Moreno-Castro, C., & Fornetti, A. (2021). Rethinking science communication in a changing landscape [Special Issue]. JCOM, 20(3). http://doi.org/10.22323/2.20030501 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20030501

Kuteeva, M. (2016). Research blogs, wikis and tweets. In K. Hyland & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 431-444). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657455-39 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657455-39

Linell, P. (1998). Discourse across boundaries: On recontextualizations and the blending of voices in professional discourse. Text & Talk, 18(2), 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.2.143 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.2.143

Lordan, R., & Devkota, H. P. (2023). Turbulence at Twitter with leadership change: Implications for health research and science communication. Exploratory Digital Health Technologies, 1, 4-10. https://doi.org/10.37349/edht.2023.00002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/edht.2023.00002

Lorés, R. & Mur-Dueñas, P. (Eds.). (2025). Mediating scientific knowledge for diverse audiences on digital platforms. Discourse, Context & Media, 68, 100958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100958 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100958

Lorés, R. (2023). Dual voices, hybrid identities: The recontextualization of research in digital dissemination scientific discourse. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 93, 69-84. https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.85566 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.85566

Lorés, R. (2024). Mediating expert knowledge: The use of pragmatic strategies in digital research digests. Journal of Pragmatics, 232, 26-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2024.08.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2024.08.007

Lorés, R. (2025). Discursive interpersonality: Engaging audiences in digital feature articles. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 103, 199-274. https://dx.doi.org/10.5209/clac.101048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.101048

Luzón, M. J. & Pérez-Llantada, C. (2022). Digital genres in academic knowledge production and communication: Perspectives and practices. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.22679776 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/LUZON4719

Luzón, M. J. (2023a). Multimodal practices of research groups in Twitter: An analysis of stance and engagement. English for Specific Purposes, 70, 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2022.10.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2022.10.006

Luzón, M. J. (2023b). Forms and functions of intertextuality in academic tweets composed by research groups. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 64, 101254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101254 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101254

Luzón, M. J. (2023c). ‘Excited to see our latest work published’: Recontextualizing research results in biomedical tweetorials. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 66, 101308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101308 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101308

Luzón, M. J. (2024). Come along for a tweetorial!: Recontextualization strategies in biomedical publication-promoting tweetorials. English for Specific Purposes, 74, 132-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.02.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.02.002

Luzón, M. J., & Albero-Posac, S. (2020). ‘Had a lovely week at #conference2018’: An analysis of interaction through conference tweets. RELC Journal, 51(1), 33-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688219896862 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688219896862

Maggio, L. A., Céspedes, L., Fleerackers, A., & Royan, R. (2024). “My doctor self and my human self”: A qualitative study of physicians’ presentation of self on social media. Medical Education, 58(10), 1192-1204. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15384 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15384

Mahrt, M., Weller, K. & Peters, I. (2014). Twitter in scholarly communication. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and Society (pp. 399-410). Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-1170-9

Maier, C. D., & Engberg, J. (2021). Harvard Business Review's reframing of digital communication: From professional expertise to practical guidance. Journal of Pragmatics, 176, 186-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.005

Martínez, L. S. (2025). Twitter and health communication. In G. J. de Bruijn & H. Vandebosch (Eds.), Health, media, and communication (pp. 269-286). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110775426-015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110775426-015

Marwick, A., & boyd, d. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114-133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313

Matsuda, P. K. (2015). Identity in written discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 35, 140-159. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000178

Mazarakis, A., & Peters, I. (2015). Science 2.0 and conference tweets: What? Where? Why? When? The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4), 269-282.

Mellado, C., & Hermida, A. (2024). The Journalist on Social Media: Mapping the Promoter, Celebrity and Joker Roles on Twitter and Instagram. Digital Journalism, 12(4), 494-515. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2151484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2151484

Mondal, H., Atanasov, A. G., Eibensteiner, F., Hribersek, M., Brandstätter, S., Matin, M., Lordan, R., Kletecka-Pulker, M. & Willschke, H. (2023). Science communication on X (formerly Twitter): A picture is worth a thousand characters? Exploratory Digital Health Technologies, 1, 28-34. https://doi.org/10.37349/edht.2023.00005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/edht.2023.00005

Mur-Dueñas, P. & Pascual, D. (2023). Metadiscoursal Realisation of Pragmatic Strategies @ResearchProject Twitter Accounts. Atlantis: Journal of the Spanish Association of Anglo-American Studies, 45(2), 119-150. https://doi.org/10.28914/Atlantis-2023-45.2.06 DOI: https://doi.org/10.28914/Atlantis-2023-45.2.06

Mur-Dueñas, P. (2025). Digital scientific dissemination practices on environmental economic sustainability: An analysis of lexical and metadiscoursal choices. ESP Today, 13(1), 113-133. https://doi.org/10.18485/esptoday.2025.13.1.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/esptoday.2025.13.1.6

Murillo, S. (2025). The use of emojis in X/Twitter for research recontextualization. Discourse, Context & Media, 68, 100950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100950 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100950

Pascual, D. (2024). Identidad colectiva e implicación de la audiencia en blogs escritos en inglés de proyectos de investigación internacionales. In I. Aldama Pando, R. Company Almagro, J. García Pérez, M. López Romero & I. Martín del Barrio (Eds.), Voces Emergentes de la Lingüística Actual (pp. 295-316). Editorial Universidad de Sevilla. https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/9788447227570 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/9788447227570

Pascual, D., & Mur-Dueñas, P. (2022). Dialogic interaction with diversified audiences in twitter for research dissemination purposes. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 90, 61-79. https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.81307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.81307

Pascual, D., Plo-Alastrué, R., & Corona, I. (2023). Digital scholarly practices in scientific communication: Paths and goals in research dissemination. In R. Plo-Alastrué & I. Corona (Eds.), Digital scientific communication: Identity and visibility in research dissemination (pp. 3-30). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38207-9_1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38207-9_1

Puschmann, C. (2015). A digital mob in the ivory tower? Context collapse in scholarly communication online. In M. Bondi, S. Cacchiani & D. Mazzi (Eds.), Discourse in and through the media: Recontextualizing and reconceptualizing expert discourse (pp. 22-45). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Sabus, C., Johns, B., Schultz, N., & Gagnon, K. (2019). Exploration of Content and Reach of Physical Therapy-Related Discussion on Twitter. Physical therapy, 99(8), 1048-1055. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzz063 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzz063

Sifianou, M., & Bella, S. (2019). Twitter, politeness, self-presentation. In P. Bou-Franch & P. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich (Eds.), Analysing digital discourse: New insights and future directions (pp. 341-365). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92663-6_12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92663-6_12

Smadja, D. M., & Sonnac, N. (2025). A highway for disinformation? The alarming exodus of scientists from Twitter/X and its consequences. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, 21, 1127-1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12015-025-10864-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12015-025-10864-1

Suau-Jiménez, F., Lorés Sanz, R., Mapelli, G., & Herrando Rodrigo, I. (2021). La interpersonalidad discursiva como alternativa al metadiscurso interpersonal. Onomázein, 54, 113-141. https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.54.07 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.54.07

Villares, R. (2025). Twitter conference discussion sessions: How and why researchers engage in online discussions. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 13(1), 86-112. https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.13.01.05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.13.01.05

Wageck, B., Noal, I. S., Guterres, B. D., Adami, S. L., Bordin, D., Fanfa, M., & Nunes, G. S. (2023). Keep posting and following social media profiles about physical therapy, but be aware! A cross-sectional study of social media posts on Instagram and Twitter. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 27(1), 100484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100484

Weller, K., Bruns, A., Burgess, J., Mahrt, M., & Puschmann, C. (Eds.). (2014). Twitter and society (Digital Formations, Vol. 89). Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-1170-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-1170-9

Wellman, M. L. (2024). “A friend who knows what they’re talking about”: Extending source credibility theory to analyze the wellness influencer industry on Instagram. New Media & Society, 26(12), 7020-7036. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231162064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231162064

Yus, F. (2025). Emoji Pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73723-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73723-7

Zappavigna, M. (2011). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter. New Media & Society, 13(5), 788-806. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385097 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385097

Zappavigna, M., & Logi, L. (2024). Emoji and social media paralanguage. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009179829 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009179829

Zhang, A. L. (2025). Performing ‘the scientist,’ credibly and authentically: understanding how scientists manage their self-presentation on social media. Information, Communication & Society, 121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2565313 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2565313