Factiva and Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – Scholars rely on electronic databases to conduct searches and locate relevant citations. The purpose of this paper is to compare the retrieval results on the same topic (multiple sclerosis and liberation therapy) of two commonly used databases for searching print news media: ProQuest’s Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies and Dow Jones’ Factiva. Design/methodology/approach – A case study comparing two electronic searchable databases using the same keywords, date range, and newspaper-specific search parameters across three Canadian university institutions. Findings – Considerable differences were found between institutional searches using Factiva. Factiva allows all individual users the capacity to establish systems-wide “administrator” privileges, thereby controlling the output for subsequent users if these preferences are not changed. The capacity for individual users to tailor searches within Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies was more in line with standard protocols for institutions paying for single user accounts with access to multiple sessions within that same institution: any user-specific searching/retrieval preferences are individually contained within a search and do not influence the searches of a different user. Research limitations/implications – What began as a comparative analysis of two commonly used databases for searching print news media turned into an examination of larger systemic problems. The findings call into question several factors: the integrity of a researcher-generated data set; the quality of results published in peer-reviewed journals based on researcher-generated data sets derived from established e-resource databases; the reliability of the same e-resource database across multiple institutions; and the quality of e-resource databases for scholarly research when developed to serve primarily non-academic clients. Originality/value – No comparison of this kind for these particular e-resource databases has been documented in the literature. In fact, the scholarly publications that address questions of functionality and reliability of either Factiva or Proquest have not brought this issue into the discussion. Therefore, this study furthers academic discourse on the nature and reliability of database use at any academic institution and illustrates that researchers, in a variety of academic fields, cannot depend on the reliability of their search results without thoroughly consulting the various settings of their database.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.039 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it