MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005840824 · doi:10.1108/20426761211203247

Macro‐social marketing and social engineering: a systems approach

2012· article· en· W2005840824 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Marketing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicService and Product Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial marketingPublic relationsSocial changeMarketingGovernment (linguistics)Psychological interventionFlexibility (engineering)MacroLegislationOriginalityBusinessPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyPsychologyEconomic growthQualitative researchSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to show how macro‐social marketing and social engineering can be integrated and to illustrate their use by governments as part of a positive social engineering intervention with examples from the Canadian anti‐smoking campaign. Design/methodology/approach This is a conceptual paper that uses the case of the Canadian anti‐smoking campaign to show that macro‐social marketing, as part of a wider systems approach, is a positive social engineering intervention. Findings The use of macro‐social marketing by governments is most effective when it is coupled with other interventions such as regulations, legislation, taxation, community mobilization, research, funding and education. When a government takes a systems approach to societal change, such as with the Canadian anti‐smoking campaign, this is positive use of social engineering. Research limitations/implications The social marketer can understand their role within the system and appreciate that they are potentially part of precipitating circumstances that make society susceptible to change. Social marketers further have a role in creating societal motivation to change, as well as promoting social flexibility, creating desirable images of change, attitudinal change and developing individual's skills, which contribute to macro‐level change. Practical implications Social marketers need to understand the structural and environmental factors contributing to the problem behavior and focus on the implementers and controllers of society‐wide strategic interventions. Social implications Eliminating all factors which enable problem behaviors creates an environmental context where it is easy for consumers to change behavior and maintain that change. Originality/value The value of this paper is in extending the literature on macro‐social marketing by governments and identifying the broader strategy they may be undertaking using positive social engineering. It is also in showing how marketers may use this information.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.198 · 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