Back to @ScienceMagazine's profile

Science Magazine engagement report

@ScienceMagazine - 4.8M followers on X

Measured over 167 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 31, 2026.

Engagement

Middle of its size range
Per follower
0.003%
of 4.8M followers
Per impression
0.348%
41K views on a typical post
Reach
0.86%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
143
interactions (median)
Saved
0.071%
29 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
6.17/day
active 67% of days
Peak time
18:00 UTC
Thursday

A typical post picks up 143 interactions against 4.8M followers, an engagement rate of 0.003%. Measured over 167 original posts, its engagement rate beats 29% of 3,758 tracked accounts of a similar size, which puts it in the middle of its size range rather than at either end. Posts are seen about 41K times each, and 0.348% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.862% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 6.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on roughly 67% of days. Most posts go out around 18:00 UTC, and Thursday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 167 posts sampled, 98% carry an image or video and 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 2.4K interactions, about 17x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #sciencemagarchives, #scienceperspective, #sciencepodcast.

Measured over 167 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 31, 2026. Recurring tags: #sciencemagarchives, #scienceperspective, #sciencepodcast.

Compared with accounts its own size

Science Magazine's engagement rate beats 29% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,758 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 10 of 10)). A percentile is spread evenly by construction, so 50 really is the middle of that group and 90 really is its top tenth.

On engagement per impression rather than per follower it beats 30% of the same group. When those two numbers disagree, the gap is about how far its posts travel rather than how people react to them.

Where this sits in the catalog

At 0.003%, Science Magazine sits above the 10th percentile of the 36,378 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.012%.

p100.002%
p250.012%
p50 (median)0.08%
p750.432%
p902.10%
p99161.0%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 36,378 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 107,364 times apart and a linear axis would flatten everything below the median into a single point.
Show the percentile table
Engagement rate percentiles
PercentileEngagement rate
10th percentile0.002%
25th percentile0.012%
50th percentile0.08%
75th percentile0.432%
90th percentile2.10%
99th percentile161.0%

This ruler is the whole measured catalog, not a size-matched group: it shows where the raw rate falls across every account we can measure, all of which are large. For a like-for-like comparison, read the size-band percentile above instead. See how the bands are built

Posting timing

This account posts most often around 18:00 UTC, and Thursday is its busiest day of the week. The bars below are the catalog-wide pattern, with this account's own busiest slot marked. They do not show how this account performs at each hour: we keep one aggregate per account, not one per hour, so that measurement does not exist in our data.

Engagement by hour posted, UTCTwenty-four bars, one per UTC hour. Each bar shows how posts published in that hour compare with their own authors' median engagement. Bars above the centre line ran higher than the median, bars below ran lower. A marker flags Busiest hour: 18:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 6%Busiest hour: 18:00 UTC
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
Engagement by hour posted, UTC
Hour (UTC)Vs author medianPosts
00:00 UTC-1%50K
01:00 UTC-2%51K
02:00 UTC-3%50K
03:00 UTC-4%53K
04:00 UTC-6%43K
05:00 UTC-4%42K
06:00 UTC-4%48K
07:00 UTC-5%52K
08:00 UTC-4%60K
09:00 UTC-3%69K
10:00 UTC-2%72K
11:00 UTC-3%78K
12:00 UTC-2%86K
13:00 UTC-2%94K
14:00 UTC-4%97K
15:00 UTC-2%100K
16:00 UTC-3%97K
17:00 UTC-2%90K
18:00 UTC-1%84K
19:00 UTC-2%79K
20:00 UTC-1%74K
21:00 UTC-1%66K
22:00 UTC-2%57K
23:00 UTC-2%51K
Engagement by day of weekSeven bars, one per weekday, Sunday first. Each bar shows how posts published on that day compare with their own authors' median engagement. Bars above the centre line ran higher than the median, bars below ran lower. A marker flags Busiest day: Thursday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 5%Busiest day: Thursday
Show engagement by day of week as a table
Engagement by day of week
DayVs author medianPosts
Sunday+4%230K
Monday0%286K
Tuesday-2%276K
Wednesday-1%251K
Thursday-1%244K
Friday-3%252K
Saturday+3%227K
See what moves engagement across the whole catalogWhat counts as a good engagement rate at this size

Best tweets

  • Aug 15, 202617x their median

    Between June 2024 and January 2025, a full 62% of commercial honey bee colonies in the United States died, according to an extensive survey.⁠ ⁠ As soon as scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) caught wind of the die-offs, they sprang into action—but their efforts were slowed by a series of federal funding cuts and layoffs. 6 months later, USDA scientists finally identified a culprit.⁠ ⁠ According to a preprint posted last June, nearly all the dead colonies tested positive for bee viruses spread by parasitic mites. Alarmingly, every single one of the mites the researchers screened was resistant to amitraz, the only viable mite-specific pesticide—or miticide—of its kind left in humans’ arsenal.⁠ ⁠ Tracking the rise of miticide resistance is critical, experts say. Honey bees pollinate more than 90 commercial crops in the U.S., generate between $20 billion and $30 billion in agricultural revenue, and play a key role in keeping the U.S. food supply stable.⁠ Learn more on #NationalHoneyBeeDay: https://t.co/0EOulEPmAL

    1.6K6795770196K viewsView on X
  • Aug 22, 202611x their median

    In July 2023, researchers on a whale watching expedition in the Caribbean Sea encountered an unusual scene: 11 sperm whales clustered tightly at the water’s surface. The animals began to inch closer and closer together in the waters off the island of Dominica, with their attention turned to one individual, until a burst of blood tinted the water. At first, the scientists—part of @ProjectCETI, a nonprofit that studies how sperm whales interact—thought the animal had been attacked. But then they saw a tiny tail pop out of the water. The researchers quickly realized they had in fact observed a group of whales helping a calf take its first breath. Even more fortuitous, they had captured it on video from a drone. Read more: https://t.co/eeuiQfmriB @NewsfromScience

    1.3K177329140K viewsView on X
  • Aug 13, 20267.3x their median

    Memories can survive even after the brain temporarily loses more than half of its synaptic connections, according to a new mouse study in Science, which challenges the long-held view that long-term memories depend on stable individual synapses. Learn more: https://t.co/6PbiaMd1F8

    8042061220121K viewsView on X
  • Aug 17, 20266.7x their median

    "I realized writing is a process that not only transforms ideas into text, but also allows the writer to continuously question and refine those ideas. The AI never did this." #ScienceWorkingLife https://t.co/P0k2irAw7P https://t.co/h02zjdzBAn

    72720292777K viewsView on X
  • Aug 23, 20266.7x their median

    In 2023, researchers in a deep-sea submersible west of Australia came across several whale skeletons 2400 meters deeper than had ever been described. As the expedition continued, the scientists found an unprecedented abundance of skeletons—the biggest, deepest, and oldest collection ever seen on the sea floor. Learn more: https://t.co/erashDTYrQ

    84195144495K viewsView on X
  • Aug 26, 20266.4x their median

    Dogs are humanity's best friend—but how long has it been that way? 🐕 A 2020 Science study investigated ancient dog genomes, revealing a complicated genetic legacy that reflects a long, shared history with humans. Learn more on #InternationalDogDay: https://t.co/Bl2JcfNov0 https://t.co/WlkhfNtVpv

    72017414679K viewsView on X
  • Aug 18, 20265.3x their median

    The virus PelV-1 has a tail of unprecedented length. Learn more: https://t.co/rsQyTqEhOW #ScienceMagArchives https://t.co/sJ7E4kwJoV

    615105152990K viewsView on X
  • Aug 17, 20264.5x their median

    Scientists have created the first comprehensive map of the human vagus nerve, tracing thousands of individual nerve fibers stretching from the lower brain stem to all major organs. The map might help scientists and doctors more precisely stimulate the nerve as a potential treatment for conditions such as epilepsy, stroke, and inflammatory diseases. Learn more: https://t.co/XRHfmivUjk @NewsfromScience

    49213061058K viewsView on X
  • Aug 22, 20264.3x their median

    The evolution of the human brain may owe as much to fruit and honey as to meat, according to a new Science Analytical Review. The findings challenge one of the dominant ideas about our ancestors' diet. Learn more: https://t.co/k8qOowp46f https://t.co/7YPFvB24Fv

    473116181283K viewsView on X
  • Aug 25, 20264.2x their median

    Carnivorous sundew plants know they’ve trapped their dinner thanks to glutathione. Learn more in @ScienceAdvances: https://t.co/JG75jzUbDp https://t.co/PAAsgOhRaq

    49990611103K viewsView on X

Ranked by total interactions across everything we have tracked for this account, which is a longer history than the 30-day window the rates above use. The multiple compares each post to this account's own median.

Recurring topics

#sciencemagarchives#scienceperspective#sciencepodcast#scienceworkinglife#sciencepolicyarticle

The most frequent hashtags in the sampled posts. They describe what this account writes about; they are not a performance signal, and the catalog-wide breakdown on the hub shows how little hashtag count moves.

Buy or sell X accounts - escrow-protected

PlayerSells is an escrow marketplace for X accounts. Every deal is protected, with no middleman risk.

Reading these numbers

A typical post picks up 143 interactions against 4.8M followers, an engagement rate of 0.003%. Measured over 167 original posts, its engagement rate beats 29% of 3,758 tracked accounts of a similar size, which puts it in the middle of its size range rather than at either end. Posts are seen about 41K times each, and 0.348% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.862% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 6.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on roughly 67% of days. Most posts go out around 18:00 UTC, and Thursday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 167 posts sampled, 98% carry an image or video and 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 2.4K interactions, about 17x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #sciencemagarchives, #scienceperspective, #sciencepodcast.

What is Science Magazine's engagement rate on X?
Science Magazine (@ScienceMagazine) has an engagement rate of 0.003%, based on the median interactions across 167 original posts from the last 30 days against 4,767,086 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.003%, Science Magazine sits above the 10th percentile of the 36,378 accounts in this comparison. Those comparison accounts are all large ones, because our scanning cadence is weighted towards big accounts, so this is a ranking among peers of similar scale rather than a ranking across X.
Does @ScienceMagazine have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 29% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,758 accounts), which puts it in the middle of its size range group. Ranking inside a size band matters because engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly re-measure the follower count. It is a starting point for a look at follower quality, not a verdict on it.
When does @ScienceMagazine post?
Most posts go out around 18:00 UTC, and Thursday is its busiest day, at roughly 6.17 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going