MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Voter Mobilization in Intimate Networks

2019· reference-entry· en· W2977896714 on OpenAlexaff
Florian Foos, Eline A. de Rooij

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobilizationTurnoutContext (archaeology)Political mobilizationSocial network (sociolinguistics)Social mobilizationSocial psychologyPoliticsTest (biology)Social network analysisSurvey data collectionPolitical sciencePsychologySociologySocial capitalGeographyVotingSocial scienceSocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Political scientists have long observed that interactions within intimate networks such as the household are correlated with higher and concordant turnout behavior. However, it is unclear whether these correlations arise due to social influence, selection, or a shared context, and, if the first, whether it is indeed the intimacy of networks that moderates social influence. This article locates the study of voter mobilization in intimate networks within the context of partisan campaigns and presents examples of studies that apply different strategies to identify social influence between family members, friends, and neighbors. Looking to future advances, the article emphasizes design-based approaches, the collection of detailed covariate data on network characteristics, and collaborations with partner organizations to experimentally test theories of indirect voter mobilization.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Media and Politics→French-language works237,207→