MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009119074 · doi:10.15173/jpc.v2i1.112

Recalling Toyota’s Crisis: Utilizing the Discourse of Renewal

2013· article· en· W2009119074 on OpenAlex
Lindsey B. Anderson

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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 Professional Communication · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsCrisis communicationRhetorical questionOrder (exchange)SociologyDiscourse analysisFrame (networking)Crisis managementPublic relationsFocus (optics)Crisis responseFrame analysisPolitical scienceContent analysisLawBusinessLinguisticsSocial scienceEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study applies the theoretical framework of the discourse of renewal to Toyota’s lingering crisis (safety recalls) in order to understand how this approach is utilized as well as to demonstrate the appropriateness of the response. The discourse of renewal is a rhetorical crisis communication strategy that attempts to frame a crisis event as an organizational opportunity and tends to focus on the future rather than the past. In this case study, six commercials produced by Toyota were analyzed using these overarching principles associated with the discourse of renewal. Results indicate that this approach was utilized in Toyota’s crisis communication and appear to have been an appropriate response to the crisis. Further analysis also reveals that the overarching themes associated with the discourse of renewal (opportunities and the future) need to be expanded in order to account for the historical elements that contextualize the crisis and the existing image of the organization. ©Journal of Professional Communication, all rights reserved.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.351 · 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