Muslim Pilgrims' Use of Electronic Billboards (EBBs) and Message Recall: Examining the Effectiveness of the EBBs as a PSA Tool
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study has examined the utility of the electronic billboards (EBBs) as a public service announcement (PSA) tool in the Holy Mosque area, Makkah Al-Mukarramah. Data were gathered from a non-probability sample of the Omrah pilgrims on the use, perceptions, and recall of the EBB messages. In-depth interviews with informants were also used to help interpret the data. Pilgrims’ attention to the billboards and their recall of the messages were used as factors of billboard utility and effectiveness. On the basis of frequency distribution analysis coupled with simple elaboration through contingency and partial contingency tables, and zero-order and 5th order partial correlations, the study concludes that despite their potential for high effectiveness the EBBs are not producing much of an impact on the pilgrims. Recommendations are proffered on how best to improve the EBBs utility as a PSA tool for the pilgrims.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".