MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044439336 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v8n2p51

Intention to Read News on the Internet: A Brazilian Public Analysis

2015· article· en· W2044439336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Renato Fonseca Alves de Andrade, Carlos Roberto Camello Lima, Fernando Antônio de Melo Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Digital Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetNewspaperReading (process)Exploratory factor analysisComputer scienceInternet usersLogistic regressionWorld Wide WebAdvertisingPerceptionService (business)PsychologyBusinessPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of the research was to identify factors related to the usage of the Internet service of readings, assessed by Brazilian readers and evaluate the intended use of readers based on the factors we have found. The methodological procedures involved conducted an online survey research, with the formation of a database formed by the Brazilian public that uses the Internet. Multivariate analysis techniques, such as exploratory factor analysis and logistic regression analysis were used. In the perception of the readers, there are three dimensions that differentiate the innovative user from the late user regarding the use of the web to read news, namely: the practicality of the platform, knowledge of technology and the external influence. From the results it can be concluded that the innovative public drives the latent growth of reading newspapers on the Internet and those who do not intend to use in the future may become users following the evolution and popularization of digital media.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.349
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.148 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicEducation and Digital TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207