MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888927541 · doi:10.11114/smc.v6i2.3575

A Schematic Discoursal Study of Chinese Football Players’ Commercial Transfer News

2018· article· en· W2888927541 on OpenAlexaff
Wenhui Yang, Junpeng Zhao, Kaiyue Zhen

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Media and Communication · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGuangdong University of Foreign StudiesMinistry of Education, India
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionConstruct (python library)EntertainmentCognitionFootballFrame (networking)SociologyPsychologyLinguisticsCognitive scienceAdvertisingComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This cognitive discoursal study explores human cognitive mechanisms by analyzing Football Players’ Commercial Transfer News (FPCTN) through adopting Gibbs’ (2010) embodied view of image schemas in language use and their interpretations in Chinese sports contexts, based on the database of 36 pieces of news reports collected from authoritative sports websites. The results demonstrate that FPCTN writers actively construct their meanings and perspectives by applying various metaphysical and metaphysicalized forms of image schemas, which are grounded on our knowledge and daily bodily experience. Discourse consumers, on the other hand, unconsciously engage themselves in imaginative simulation processes, which are fundamentally embodied in their past and present bodily experiences, to facilitate their understanding of linguistic information and writers’ intentions, which predicates the process of public general cognition construction and frame, meanwhile, constituting the mechanism of a news reader’s passionate identification with and attachment to a potential commodity in his/her social and entertainment life.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Media and CommunicationSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207