MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901109389 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2018v43n4a3300

An Examination of the Framing of Climate Change by the Government of Canada, 2006–2016

2018· article· en· W2901109389 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Andrew Chater

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)Political scienceClimate changeHumanitiesEthnologySociologyGeographyArchaeologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background How has the Government of Canada framed the issue of climate change in Canada’s northern region during the last decade? Analysis This article undertakes a discourse analysis of Canadian government speeches, statements, and reports relating to northern climate change since 2006. It argues that the rhetoric of the 2006–2015 Conservative government de-emphasized the impact of Arctic climate change on the people of the North. It stressed the threat to environmental security and nature. Conclusions and implications This article contributes to literature that understands how governments frame issues, as well as literature that examines the framing of climate change and reviews of Canada’s northern policy.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207