MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211212340 · doi:10.32920/19158440.v1

Like, comment, and share the university experience: exploring the narratives present in Ontario universities' Instagram profiles

2022· preprint· en· W4211212340 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aimee Jeanne Padillo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeEvent (particle physics)PortraitInstitutionStyle (visual arts)PsychologyLibrary scienceSociologyVisual artsArtComputer scienceLiteratureSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this study was to explore the visual content and discourse present in three Ontario universities’ Instagram profiles, particularly their profiles dedicated to student recruitment and admissions. The study looked at the Instagram content published by top-three high application volume universities: McMaster University (macadmit), Ryerson University (whyryerson), and University of Toronto (futureuoft). The data collected was composed of photos, videos, and captions from all three universities from September 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 inclusive. The results showed that visual assets highlighting the institution, portraits of students, and event/advertisements were the most occurring types of Instagram content. In addition, there was a high use of event/advertisement style in the accompanying captions. When the visual assets and captions were juxtaposed against each other, there was a high incongruence between the pairing which can be laborious for readers who will need to consolidate the visual and text information.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWeb and Library ServicesFrench-language works237,207