MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2348805706 · doi:10.1177/1470593115607940

No joke

2015· article· en· W2348805706 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

VenueMarketing Theory · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeMetaphorDepictionNormativePerceptionOrder (exchange)Mass mediaSociologyPeriod (music)JokePsychologySocial psychologyAdvertisingPublic relationsPolitical scienceBusinessAestheticsLiteratureArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unflattering representations of salesmanship in mass media exist in abundance. In order to gauge the depiction of selling in mass media, this article explores the nature and public perceptions of salesmanship using editorial cartoons. A theory of cartooning suggests that editorial cartoons reflect public sentiment toward events and issues and therefore provide a useful way of measuring and tracking such sentiment over time. The criteria of narrative, location, binary struggle, normative transference, and metaphor were used as a framework to analyze 286 cartoons over a 30-year period from 1983 to 2013. The results suggest that while representations of the characteristics and behaviors of salespeople shifted very little across time periods, changes in public perceptions of seller–buyer conflict, the role of the customer, and selling techniques were observed, thus indicating that cartoons are sensitive enough to measure the portrayal of selling.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.293 · 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