MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120120501 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n18p144

Who Is Tweeting on #PRU13?

2014· article· en· W2120120501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohd Faizal Kasmani, Rosidayu Sabran, Noor Adzrah Ramle

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaTimelineMicrobloggingOpposition (politics)General electionPoliticsPolitical scienceThematic analysisPublic relationsMedia studiesPolitical communicationAdvertisingSociologyQualitative researchSocial scienceBusinessLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The popular microblogging platform known as Twitter has become a legitimate and frequently used communication channel in the Malaysian political arena. While the 2008 Malaysian general election was notable for the use of social media by the opposition parties during their campaigns, the 2013 general election saw a level playing field in which the Barisan Nasional coalition had quickly caught up in its use of social media. This study draws on a content analysis of election-related Twitter messages collected under the #pru13 hashtag to describe the key patterns of activity and the thematic foci of the election’s coverage on this particular social media site. The dataset is collected from Twitter’s public timeline from May 1to May 6, 2013. What emerged from this analysis is there are evidently intensified and amplified campaign messages polluting the #pru13 hastag from accounts that are questionable in their origin. This study adds to the literature that has questioned the predictive power of social media in an election.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207