MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735328896 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v7n4p56

Gender and Age Patterns on WhatsApp Statuses as Used by Jordanians: A Sociolinguistic Perspective

2017· article· en· W2735328896 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ala'a Mohammad Al-Smadi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)DemographyPsychologyPoliticsAge groupsSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologySociologyPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at investigating the WhatsApp statuses as used by Jordanian people from a sociolinguistic point of view. It attempts to examine the use of the WhatsApp statuses in relation to the impact of gender and age on the topic being used. To achieve this goal, 400 statuses were collected from Jordanian males and females who are divided into two main age groups: the first one consists of participants whose age is above 30 years old, and the second group whose participants are under 30 years old. Then, the data were analyzed quantitatively and categorized based on the main following topics; religious, social, political, economic and fixed statuses. The results show that gender and age have essential impacts on the statuses being used. For example, the religious statuses are the most frequently used topic by Jordanian females whereas the social statuses are the most frequently used topic by Jordanian males. However, the political and economic statuses are the least frequent statuses used among Jordanian. Moreover, the results show that the most frequently used topic among males who are above 30 years old is the fixed statuses suggested by the mobile itself whereas the most frequently used topic among males who are under 30 years old is the social topic. On the other hand, the impact of age among females is clearly manifested in the use of the fixed statuses suggested by the mobile itself. For instance, the females who are above 30 years old use the fixed statuses more dramatic than the females who are under 30 years old. Also, the fixed statuses are the second frequently used topic by the females who are above 30 years old whereas they are the third frequently used topic by females who are under 30 years old.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicDigital Communication and LanguageFrench-language works237,207