MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283513084

La importancia de las Ciencias de la Comunicación en las campañas sociales

2011· article· es· W2283513084 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdvertising and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las campanas sociales representan la puesta en practica de estrategias de comunicacion en los medios por parte de los poderes publicos y de los organismos sin fines lucro que se preocupan por las causas sociales. Ellas constituyen un elemento poderoso de todo programa educativo que pretende interpelar a los miembros del publico, informarlos y convencerlos de lo positivo de una causa o de un comportamiento saludable. En general, las campanas sociales se realizan inspiradas en las propuestas del marketing social. Segun ciertos investigadores, el exito relativo de las campanas sociales se explica, entre otras cosas, por el hecho que no se explotan bien los conceptos teoricos y metodologicos de las ciencias sociales. Desde nuestro punto de vista, la investigacion en ciencias sociales, y en particular en comunicacion, deberia ser integrada en el proceso del marketing social. En este articulo presentamos los modelos de persuasion mas utilizados en las campanas, algunos modelos teoricos que ayudan a comprender su influencia, asi como ejemplos de como han sido utilizados en algunas campanas, aumentando asi sus posibilidades de exito

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvertising and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207