MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550229264 · doi:10.1080/07268602.2017.1239520

Linguistic Representation of Ideological Strategies in Two Iranian Newspapers Written in English

2016· article· en· W2550229264 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Shokouhi, Raha Moazed

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Linguistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperboleNewspaperLinguisticsIdeologyIronyLexicalizationExaggerationSociologyHistoryMetaphorPsychologyMedia studiesPolitical sciencePoliticsPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigates ideological strategies mainly embodied in X-phemism in light of Van Dijk’s and Charteris-Black’s frameworks of the construction of reality in news reports. To this aim, a representative sample of 239 news reports was selected for a one-year period (end of January 2010 to end of January 2011) from two Iranian newspapers published in English—the Tehran Times and Kayhan International. A total of 11,938 strategies from 10,676 clauses in these newspapers were analyzed, both quantitatively in terms of frequency of occurrence for each strategy, and qualitatively for the reason of occurrence. Findings have revealed that both news outlets contain a wide range of ideological strategies, among which Objectivity with its sub-strategies, Negative and Positive Lexicalization as part of metaphor, and Exaggeration/Hyperbole were the most frequent whereas Counterfactuals, Openness/Honesty and Irony had the lowest frequencies. The quantitative and qualitative findings are discussed in the result and discussion sections.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.007
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of LinguisticsSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207