MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health Information and Advertising Appeals in Food Commercials: A Content Analysis

2013· article· en· W2118605014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kara Chan, Vivienne Leung, Lennon Tsang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutritional Therapeutics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHong Kong Baptist University
KeywordsAdvertisingContent (measure theory)Content analysisFood scienceHealth claims on food labelsPsychologyBusinessChemistrySociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A content analysis of 311 food commercials broadcast on television networks in Hong Kong was conducted. There were nearly equal proportions of ads for healthy and unhealthy foods. The three most frequently used advertising appeals were taste/flavor/smell/texture, health/wellbeing and physical performance/speed/strength. Altogether 54 percent of the food ads contained health-related claims. Intriguingly, 23 percent of the ads for unhealthy food contained health-related claims. The prevalent use of general health claims in unhealthy food ads calls for policy makers to devise better ways to regulate health claims in food advertisements. This is the first content analysis of health and nutrition information in food advertising arising from a society with a rich herbalist tradition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nutritional TherapeuticsSame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207