MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902806578 · doi:10.5539/ells.v8n4p46

Measuring Ideologically-Based Responses

2018· article· en· W2902806578 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hanan A. Ebaid

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyInterpersonal communicationPoliticsSociologySocial psychologySocial sciencePolitical sciencePsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current paper attempts to propose a device by which ideologically based responses can be measured in the interpersonal discourse of ideology. As a result of some drastic political changes, the Egyptian society has witnessed during the last five years a wave of conflicting ideologies, each of which is endorsed by some people and rejected by others. The different types of social media such as Facebook and Twitter are global and influential channels of the communication of diverse ideologies. A Facebook account of a supposedly Egyptian Jewish woman was specially created for collecting the data to be analysed in this paper. The paper is a qualitative research whose data is collected through an interaction between a Facebook account owner and some other users. The data is categorized into three groups each of which represents a certain area in a spectrum of ideologically based responses. One of the main findings reached through data analysis is that ideological responses can be measured and that there are mainly three types of responses in interpersonal ideological discourse, namely positive, passive and negative. It also concludes that each type of responses displays some distinctive features. This spectrum helps measure and interprets different types of responses to one’s ideology.

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)0.006
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 score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207