MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972974441 · doi:10.69554/yrjs8950

Leveraging influencers to tell an authentic brand story and drive return on investment: Case study of Travel Alberta and Expedia Media Solutions

2014· article· en· W2972974441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Noah Tratt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of digital & social media marketing. · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfluencer marketingAdvertisingInvestment (military)Return on investmentBusinessMarketingPolitical scienceEconomicsMarketing managementRelationship marketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Travel Alberta, the official tourism marketing agency of the Province of Alberta, was looking to increase awareness for the region by captivating the imagination of US and Canadian travellers through unique, compelling content. Together with Expedia Media Solutions, it built a campaign that showcased the diverse experiences that Alberta has to offer, increased general awareness for the region and drove consumers to engage and interact with the brand through social media and aspirational videos. The campaign combined high-impact and tactical brand placements on Expedia points of sale in the USA and Canada, a branded Expedia blog, social media outreach, customised video content and influencer engagement. Top travel bloggers were sent to Alberta, where they captured video content around tourist destinations to serve as blog and video ad content. The campaign was a huge success, resulting in more than 81,000 room nights and 22,250 airline tickets booked to and in Alberta. It also drove more than 4.1 million social media impressions across Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of digital & social media marketing.Same topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207