Social media data enable insights into human behaviour. Researchers can access these data via platform-provided application programming interfaces (APIs), but these come with restrictive usage terms that mean studies cannot be reproduced or replicated. Platform-owned APIs hinder access, transparency and scientific knowledge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Walker, S., Mercea, D. & Bastos, M. Inf. Commun. Soc. 22, 1531–1543 (2019).
Lazer, D. et al. Nature 595, 189–196 (2021).
Pfeffer, J. et al. This sample seems to be good enough! Assessing coverage and temporal reliability of Twitter’s academic API. In Proc. 17th International AAAI Conf. on Web and Social Media (eds. Lin, R.-Y. et al.) 720–729 (AAAI Press, 2023).
Bastos, M. Am. Behav. Sci. 65, 863–883 (2021).
Acker, A. & Kreisberg, A. Arch. Sci. 20, 105–123 (2020).
John, N. A. & Nissenbaum, A. Inf. Soc. 35, 1–12 (2019).
Freelon, D. Polit. Commun. 35, 665–668 (2018).
Leerssen, P., Heldt, A. & Kettemann, M. C. in Challenges and Perspectives of Hate Speech Research (eds. Strippel, C. et al.) 405–425 (Digital Communications Research, 2023).
Sen, I., Flöck, F., Weller, K., Weiß, B. & Wagner, C. Public Opin. Q. 85, 399–422 (2021).
Bruns, A. Inf. Commun. Soc. 22, 1544–1566 (2019).
De Vreese, C. & Tromble, R. Polit. Commun. 40, 356–360 (2023).
Ohme, J. et al. Commun. Methods Meas. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2181319 (2023).
Krotov, V. & Silva, L. Legality and ethics of web scraping. In Americas Conf. on Information Systems, https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2018/DataScience/Presentations/17 (2018).
Fiesler, C., Beard, N. & Keegan, B. C. No robots, spiders, or scrapers: legal and ethical regulation of data collection methods in social media terms of service. In 14th International AAAI Conf. on Web and Social Media, 187–196 (AAAI, 2020).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
B.I.D. conceptualized the work; B.I.D., D.W., D.R., J.H. and D.A.P. wrote the original draft; B.I.D., D.R., D.A.P., D.W., E.G., J.F.R., J.H., D.v.d.L., A.G.C. and L.A reviewed and edited all later versions of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
This work was part-funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC grant ref: EP/W522090/1) as a PhD studentship to D.W. as an EPSRC iCASE with B.I.D. and J.F.R. This work also was part-funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC grant ref: EP/SO22465/1) as a PhD studentship to E.G. via the CDT in Cybersecurity TIPS-at-scale. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Human Behaviour thanks Cornelius Puschmann, Amelia Acker and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Davidson, B.I., Wischerath, D., Racek, D. et al. Platform-controlled social media APIs threaten open science. Nat Hum Behav 7, 2054–2057 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01750-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01750-2
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
The social anatomy of climate change denial in the United States
Scientific Reports (2024)
-
Social Media and Youth Mental Health: Assessing the Impact Through Current and Novel Digital Phenotyping Methods
Current Treatment Options in Psychiatry (2024)