MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147667867 · doi:10.1111/imig.12836

Digital media and international migration: Twitter discourse during the Canadian federal election

2021· article· en· W3147667867 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
James P. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Migration · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsDepictionSocial mediaRepresentation (politics)Digital mediaCreativityPublic relationsPoliticsPolitical scienceIdentity (music)SociologyFederal electionMedia studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a contentious, multidimensional issue, migration attracts significant media attention in affluent societies. While analysts have assessed coverage in traditional outlets, less is known about social media – digital platforms that facilitate the creation and sharing of content online. Working with a unique dataset of tweets from the 2019 Canadian federal election, this study analyses migration's representation within visible digital spaces. Employing content analytic methods, it offers new insight into the patterns of participation, claims‐making and engagement associated with the topic's online depiction. Alongside documenting significant lay involvement and creativity, it reveals communications were slightly negative and, reflecting the contemporary political climate, significantly more likely to feature identity‐based issues than economic and redistributive concerns. Messages from professional broadcasters, as well as, those featuring negative sentiments and referencing cultural matters generated greater engagement. The implications of these results and recommendations for future research are considered.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0220.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational MigrationSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207