MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3085749619 · doi:10.47577/tssj.v11i1.1624

COVID-19 Translated: WHO’s and the City of Ottawa English and Arabic Narrative of the Pandemic

2020· article· en· W3085749619 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fadi Jaber

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnium Social Sciences Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePandemicNarrative inquiryHistorySociologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)LinguisticsMedia studiesPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many national and international organizations have constructed and disseminated COVID-19 public narrative and have contributed into the construction of the pandemic meta-narrative. The World Health Organization (henceforth WHO) is the international organization responsible for publishing COVID-19 related information to global audiences and citizens. However, the City of Ottawa is the Canadian federal capital responsible for disseminating information about the pandemic to its citizens who reside in Ottawa. In the light of the evolving events, this paper explores the English and Arabic public narrative of COVID-19 as constructed and published by WHO on its multilingual website and by the City of Ottawa Public Health in Canada. In specific, it scrutinizes how similar or different the communicative messages and meanings are as embedded in the English and Arabic texts of the pandemic public narrative. To do so, this paper methodologically utilizes a qualitative narrative analysis research design guided by narrative theory, types of narrative, and narrative features. Accordingly, the corpus consists of 48 English texts and their 48 Arabic translated texts which were published on WHO’s website under two COVID-19 pandemic topics: “Myth busters” and “Q & As on coronaviruses (COVID-19)”. As well, this paper analyses 12 English texts and their 12 Arabic translated texts which were published on the City of Ottawa’s website. The findings of this paper provide further understanding of similarities and differences in communicative messages and meanings as embedded in the English and Arabic public narrative of COVID-19 pandemic, and as published and represented by WHO and the City of Ottawa.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.340
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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnium Social Sciences JournalSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207