MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161430098 · doi:10.3389/fspor.2021.658293

An Analysis of Broadcasting Media Using Social Media Engagement in the WNBA

2021· article· en· W3161430098 on OpenAlexaff
Ann Pegoraro, Heather Kennedy, Nola Agha, Nicholas Brown, David J. Berri

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sports and Active Living · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueSocial mediaBroadcasting (networking)AdvertisingMedia consumptionConsumption (sociology)AthletesEmpirical researchPsychologyProduct (mathematics)Public relationsBusinessSociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there has been research into what teams, leagues, and athletes post on social media and the impact of post content on social media engagement, there is limited understanding and empirical research on the impact of broadcasting media on social sport consumption. There are an increasing number of new media through which sport leagues can distribute their content to fans. This research examines the impact of different broadcast platforms on game day engagement with WNBA team Twitter accounts. Using data for the 2016-2018 seasons, results indicate athlete/team quality and performance were positively associated with post engagement, underscoring the importance of the core sport product and potentially indicating that the WNBA is developing a star-driven culture similar to the NBA. In addition, broadcasting on League Pass or local TV (for home teams) and Twitter were associated with lower post engagement suggesting we have more to learn about maximizing online engagement.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sports and Active LivingSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207