MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W282735956

Web 2.0 and its implications for health-related social marketing campaigns

2013· article· en· W282735956 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Allyson Dooley

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearch Online (University of Wollongong) · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSocial marketingPsychographicMarketingPublic healthBusinessAdvertisingWorld Wide WebComputer scienceMedicineNursing
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Web 2.0, or new media, is increasing in usage and adoption over time. Research demonstrates that new media channels are being used by demographic groups, varying proportions of which seek health information on these platforms. Health promotion and social marketing practitioners as well as researchers are beginning to use Web 2.0 to market health-related behaviour change.\nAs the prevalence of Web 2.0 usage increases, and its nature changes, over time there are areas which warrant research examination, such as: reasons for Web 2.0 growth and adoption, the characteristics which draw different target audiences to Web 2.0 platforms, as well as the best practices that researchers and practitioners should consider when using new media channels to market health-related behaviour change.\nThis thesis contributes to our understanding of how health promotion and social marketing practitioners, as well as researchers, can use Web 2.0 to market and research health-related behaviour change.\nThis thesis contains seven articles and uses a mixed methodological approach, including qualitative and quantitative methods, in three stages. Stage 1 involved a systematic literature review and online search to document Web 2.0 reach and growth over time, user engagement in Web 2.0, and theoretical frameworks to explain why users adopt and diffuse Web 2.0. The results of this review are presented in Chapters 2 and 3; and led to determining the gaps in the Web 2.0 evidence base, which was the basis of the papers presented in Chapters 6 and 7.\nSignificant increases over time in reach and growth of Web 2.0 and new media channels by geography, technology, and age were found during the systematic literature review and online search. Users engaged in Web 2.0 channels to seek or create news, entertainment, and health information. An examination of the practical use of social marketing principles in Web 2.0 campaigns suggested that one or more principles were being applied to new media campaigns, but further coordination and integration are required.\nA framework to guide the development of a Web 2.0 research agenda identified many opportunities for Web 2.0 researchers to advance the field: documenting Web 2.0 natural history, individual risks or benefits, and specific areas relevant to the discipline of social marketing (acceptance, utilisation, social marketing principles, or best practices).\nStage 2 involved qualitative in-depth interviews (presented in Chapters 4 and 5) with 17 social marketing experts living in Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States who had utilised Web 2.0 marketing strategies. The discussion guide contained open-ended questions which gauged: reasons for campaign implementation, formative and pre-test research strategies used, campaign implementation strategies used, how campaign impact was defined, and how campaign success was measured.\nDuring the qualitative in-depth interviews, Web 2.0 experts working in social marketing discussed best practices from utilising new media channels; such as using plain language, transparent communication practices, and strategic planning for social marketing and health promotion campaigns. Interestingly, practitioners perceived more strengths than limitations with implementing a campaign on Web 2.0 platforms compared to implementing a campaign on traditional communication channels. Social marketing practitioners also used some traditional research approaches to evaluate their Web 2.0 campaigns.\nThe last phase of the research comprised a quantitative online survey (n=325) with Internet users 18 years of age and older living in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom (Chapter 8) to assess usage of Web 2.0 for health information and health engagement. New media platforms were visited by Internet users living in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States for health information and to engage in health content engagement. To reach individuals 18-34 years old, recommendations were provided to use video sharing or social media channels (Facebook or Twitter), whereas, for Internet users 55 years of age and older Twitter and LinkedIn were equally good avenues for disseminating health information, while Facebook was not.\nThe overall results of the enclosed thesis provide concrete recommendations for practitioners and researchers with regard to how to plan, monitor, and evaluate best-in-class health promotion and social marketing campaigns using Web 2.0. Modelling healthy behaviour, engaging target audiences in creating content, and disseminating messages on multiple Web 2.0 channels were examples of best practices for Web 2.0 campaigns.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,019
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,064

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,025
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,004
Communication savante0,0100,007
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0190,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,084
Tête enseignante GPT0,406
Écart entre enseignants0,322 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearch Online (University of Wollongong)Même sujetImpact of Technology on AdolescentsTravaux en français237 207