Legislation by Agenda-Setting: Assessing the Media's Role in the Regulation of Bisphenol A in the U.S. States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starting in 2008, debate about potential hazardous effects from exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) migrated from the pages of scientific journals to the U.S. media, regulatory authorities, and state legislatures. In the context of deep scientific conflict about the existence of adverse health effects attributable to BPA, this article asks why it was the case that some state legislatures considered or adopted legislative bans on products made from BPA, whereas others did not. Drawing on existing theories of agenda-setting and policy change via punctuated equilibrium as well as a well-defined methodology (event history analysis), evidence of agenda-setting is presented. Particularly, it is argued that routine and high-impact health coverage was significantly related to the chance that a state legislature considered legislation banning products made with BPA. This was indirectly, but importantly, related to the actual adoption by state legislatures of legislative bans on products made with BPA.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it