MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1559612947 · doi:10.5539/res.v7n9p41

Information Presentation of Professional Structure of Russian Society in Mass Media

2015· article· en· W1559612947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tatiana B. Malinina, Irina Borisovna Dadianova, Elena E. Tarando, Nikolay Pruel, Valeriy Malychev

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicScientific Research and Philosophical Inquiry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesSaint Petersburg State University
KeywordsMass mediaPresentation (obstetrics)Public relationsContext (archaeology)HierarchySociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper analyzes the processes of mass media data content impact on social processes taking place within society. The key role of modern mass media in person’s life as a society’s information base is brought into focus. In this context the problem of circulating information quality and adequacy of information presentation of social processes of mass media is stated. The results of mass media activity influence many social processes, particularly the process of society’s professional structure formation. When commenting profession representatives and professional activity it forms certain image of society’s professional structure. Mass media influence on real occupational skill structure of society makes itself felt through the formation of social & professional hierarchy in person’s consciousness, the hierarchy closely related to the idea of status value of one or another profession, influencing on occupational choice. The results of the empiric study of information presentation of professional structure of the Russian society in mass media realized by means of content analysis of print media publications are represented. Regression model is built based on collected data to study interrelation between a number of factors such as actual professional structure of the Russian society, information presentation of professional structure created by mass media, need for specialists, average salary, status value of professions, and various professional groups.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicScientific Research and Philosophical InquiryFrench-language works237,207