Juste part, boycott et loi spéciale. Le cadrage gouvernemental d'un printemps de crise sociale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Cet article étudie la stratégie de communication gouvernementale lors du mouvement de grève étudiante de 2012 au Québec. Six ans après la fin du conflit, et malgré la production d'un volume important d'analyses et de réflexions sur cette crise sociale, aucune étude empirique n'a recensé systématiquement le contenu de la stratégie communicationnelle du gouvernement. Par le biais d'une analyse de contenu quantitative des interventions publiques des membres de l'exécutif, cette étude relève les cadres argumentaires au cœur de la stratégie de communication gouvernementale. S'inspirant de la théorie de l'activation en cascade d'Entman, l'analyse montre comment le gouvernement a tenté de définir les problèmes, les solutions et les protagonistes impliqués dans le conflit sociétal qu'a traversé le Québec en 2012. Notre analyse met en lumière l’échec gouvernemental à maintenir au fil des évènements l'initiative du cadrage de la crise, et le changement de stratégie communicationnelle qui en résulte.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".