MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907810514 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v9n1p194

Symbolic Portrayal of Social Classes in Pakistani Advertisement

2018· article· en· W2907810514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saba Zaidi, Saman Salah, Anisa Tul Mehdi, Mehwish Sahibzada, Durdana Rafiq, Maham Sultan, Samreen Manzor

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass (philosophy)AdvertisingEmpathyRepresentation (politics)Social mediaSociologySocial classOrder (exchange)Sample (material)Content analysisQualitative researchPsychologySocial psychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusinessSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study aims to identify particular ways through which social actors are represented by Pakistani media such as MCB (Muslim Commercial Bank) Ladies Account (2017). This study is only limited to two Pakistani advertisements as a sample of study. The research design is qualitative content analysis. The study seeks to examine the propagation of class differences for the sake of gaining viewer’s empathy in order to achieve marketing purposes. The researchers have applied Leeuwen’s (2008) framework of Visual Representation of Social Actor for the analysis of data. The analysis of data has provided an insight into different ways class differences are showcased. It has further provided an insight that notion of lower/middle class is constructed and represented as “others” in the particular advertisements with the help of Visual Representation of Social Actors. The result of study validates that lower/middle class is particularly marginalized in the mentioned advertisements, whereas it has become a general practice of Pakistani media to project such kind of class dichotomy. The study has further incorporated the idea that through such kind of projections the capitalists propagate the purchase of unwanted items. Wherein, regardless of any use the viewers while empathizing with the social actors purchase the advertised items.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207