MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138329095 · doi:10.1177/107769900908600403

Variations in Media Priming: The Moderating Role of Knowledge, Interest, News Attention, and Discussion

2009· article· en· W2138329095 on OpenAlex
Sebastián Valenzuela

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPriming (agriculture)PessimismPoliticsCompetence (human resources)Social psychologyNews mediaPsychologyModerationPerspective (graphical)Political scienceSociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing research on which citizens are most and least likely to exhibit media priming effects is inconclusive. Using data from the 2006 Canadian election, this study examined the moderating role of voters' political knowledge, interest in politics, news attention, and discussion frequency. Results show priming was not constant across political involvement variables. It was strongest for citizens with moderate levels of knowledge and discussion, but was negatively related to interest. Compared to pessimistic and optimistic accounts of voters' ability to resist media influence, the findings suggest a more nuanced perspective on citizen “competence.”

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.300 · 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