MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2590072096

Implications for Minimum Unit Pricing Advocacy: What Can We Learn from UK Newsprint Coverage of Key Claim-Makers in the Policy Debate?

2014· article· en· W2590072096 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shona Hilton, Chris Patterson

Bibliographic record

VenueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsUnit priceNewspaperLegislatureUnit (ring theory)LegislationKey (lock)PoliticsPublic relationsMedia coverageCoding (social sciences)Political sciencePublic administrationEconomicsPublic economicsBusinessAdvertisingSociologyLawComputer scienceComputer securityPsychologyMicroeconomicsSocial scienceMedia studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On May 24th 2012, Scotland passed the Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) Bill. Minimum unit pricing is a legislative intervention intended to raise the price of the cheapest alcohol to reduce alcohol consumption and related harms. Communications and political sciences literatures offer a theoretical framework to investigate how competing frames about policy issues are presented in the news media from key claim-makers. Content analysis was conducted on seven UK and three Scottish national newspapers between 1st May 2011 and 31st May 2012. Relevant articles were identified using the electronic databases Nexis UK and Newsbank. A total of 262 articles were eligible for detailed coding and analysis. This paper attempts to map out the dynamic interplay between media framings from key claim-makers of what constitutes the alcohol problem and the arguments for and against minimum unit pricing in the months leading up to the passing of the legislation, with a view to informing policy advocacy.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.224
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.224
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.014
Science and technology studies0.0080.017
Scholarly communication0.0250.037
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam)→Same topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→