MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046144059 · doi:10.1002/nvsm.326

The efficacy of anti‐smoking advertisements: the role of source, message, and individual characteristics

2007· article· en· W3046144059 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvertisingAppealPsychologyQuit smokingSocial psychologyMass mediaFear appealSmoking cessationPolitical scienceMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research investigates the effects of direct and indirect sources of anti‐smoking messages. Specifically, it examines the direct influence of advertised messages and the indirect effect of the subsequent discussion. Two studies examine the role of: (i) Source characteristics (i.e., messages disseminated through mass media and subsequently via discussion by friends or strangers); (ii) Message characteristics (i.e., messages that induce either low or high fear); (iii) Individual characteristics (i.e., gender based differences within the target audience) in attitude formation towards smokers, the act of smoking, propensity to smoke, and the likelihood of being influenced. Message efficacy is found to vary by gender, type of ad appeal, as well as group membership of ad discussants. Implications for design of anti‐smoking campaigns are derived. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · 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