  Discussing research-sensemaking questions on Community Question and Answering
(CQA) platforms has been an increasingly common practice for the public to
participate in science communication. Nonetheless, how users strategically
craft research-sensemaking questions to engage public participation and
facilitate knowledge construction is a significant yet less understood problem.
To fill this gap, we collected 837 science-related questions and 157,684
answers from Zhihu, and conducted a mixed-methods study to explore
user-developed strategies in proposing research-sensemaking questions, and
their potential effects on public engagement and knowledge construction.
Through open coding, we captured a comprehensive taxonomy of question-crafting
strategies, such as eyecatching narratives with counter-intuitive claims and
rigorous descriptions with data use. Regression analysis indicated that these
strategies correlated with user engagement and answer construction in different
ways (e.g., emotional questions attracted more views and answers), yet there
existed a general divergence between wide participation and quality knowledge
establishment, when most questioning strategies could not ensure both. Based on
log analysis, we further found that collaborative editing afforded unique
values in refining research-sensemaking questions regarding accuracy, rigor,
comprehensiveness and attractiveness. We propose design implications to
facilitate accessible, accurate and engaging science communication on CQA
platforms.
