L’humour comme stratégie de communication ? Le cas des élections municipales 2009 au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le déclin de la participation électorale est un problème au Québec. Des campagnes de communication tentent de remédier à la situation comme celle du Directeur général des élections du Québec de 2009 qui avait pour but d’inciter les citoyens à voter aux élections municipales. Dans le cadre d’une étude exploratoire, la stratégie de création (l’utilisation de l’humour) de ces messages du DGE a été analysée à travers la lentille théorique du modèle de la construction de sens alors que la stratégie d’implantation (utilisation d’Internet) a été étudiée à partir du modèle des usages et gratifications. Pour ce faire, des groupes de discussion et des entrevues ont été réalisés auprès de citoyens québécois en âge de voter. Les résultats appuient nos réserves quant à la pertinence des stratégies utilisées par le DGE. Des suggestions pour l’amélioration des campagnes futures sont proposées.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".