Approach
We analyzed over 4.8 million user records, developing a pipeline to filter out bot-like activity and isolate consistent human readers. Each user’s reading timeline was reconstructed to capture paper IDs, access dates, referral sources, and reading depth, creating a comprehensive picture of how individuals navigate the scientific literature.

Key Insights

• Referral Patterns: Twitter and Google Scholar dominate as entry points, but their audiences differ—Twitter favors newer papers, while Google Scholar surfaces older ones.

• Collaboration Scale: Papers shared on LinkedIn and Facebook often come from larger research teams, suggesting that social platforms amplify highly collaborative work.

• Popularity Dynamics: The relationship between total reads and Twitter reads followed a power-law (slope ≈ 1.23), showing that viral visibility scales non-linearly with overall popularity.

• Deep Reading: By calculating click-through rates (CTR), we found that about 1% of Twitter users engage in deeper reading—indicative of selective, curiosity-driven exploration.

Impact
This research bridges data science, networks, and the science of science, offering empirical insights into how knowledge spreads through digital ecosystems. The findings inform strategies for open-access dissemination, algorithmic curation, and scientific equity in online research visibility.
Don’t worry about sounding professional. Sounds like you. There are over 1.5 billion websites out there, but your story is what’s going to separate this one from the rest.