MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332394730 · doi:10.1177/2167479513479349

“Frame-Changing” the Game

2013· article· en· W2332394730 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael L. Naraine, Jess C. Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication & Sport · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)NewsprintMainstreamFrame analysisPolitical scienceNewspaperContent analysisMedia studiesPublic relationsSociologyLawSocial scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article extends research on media framing and the concept of “frame-changing” by examining the sanctioning of professional mixed martial arts (MMA) events in Ontario, Canada. After initially indicating that sanctioning MMA was unimportant, the Ontario government shifted its policy and announced it would sanction professional MMA events. A content analysis was conducted on newsprint articles published between 2009 and 2010 that were related to the sanctioning of MMA events in Ontario. After removing syndicated reports, 18 newsprint articles derived from six major Canadian dailies served as the focus for this study. Using open and axial coding techniques, these articles identified that the media produced two frames for the discourse related to the sanctioning of MMA (i.e., legal/ethical and economic), which changed throughout the discourse. This study serves to examine how mainstream media frames the sport in jurisdictions yet to develop a MMA policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.025
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication & SportSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207