MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1950410026

Cultural consumption and the broadband revolution: Canada and Australia

2008· article· en· W1950410026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fred Fletcher, Charles Zamaria, Julian Thomas, Scott Ewing

Bibliographic record

VenueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)Political scienceGeographySociologySocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to Jeffrey Cole, Director of the USC Annenberg Centre for the Digital Future, the spread of high-speed broadband is a major factor in revolutionary changes in cultural consumption (of products, such as movies, television/ video, books, magazines, music, art and museum exhibits). Technologically, this revolution is driven not only by the new services enabled by greater bandwidth but also by the always on nature of high-speed connectivity. The revolution involves a shift in consumer perceptions of the Internet from an instrument of communication and information to a medium of entertainment, culture and self-expression. This paper will draw on comprehensive national surveys of Internet use in Canada and Australia. The two countries are similar in culture but are at different stages of Broadband adoption, making the comparisons particularly apt. Within Canada, we are able to compare responses to Canadian Internet Project surveys in 2004 and 2007. The analysis will focus on the following variables: Cultural consumption activities, such as downloading of videos and music; shifts from traditional to new media as sources of entertainment; willingness to pay for / subscribe to Internet services; incidence and frequency of online content production and participation in online social networks. We will compare the reported behaviour of Internet users and non-users, those with or without home broadband access, experience with and intensity of Internet use, age and life stage, as well as other demographic differences, to help build a profile of different types of cultural consumer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.222 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology)Same topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207