MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225109426 · doi:10.1145/3491101.3519760

“Sounds like a Cheesy Radio Ad”: Using User Perspectives for Enhancing Digital COVID Vaccine Communication Strategies for Public Health Agencies

2022· article· en· W4225109426 on OpenAlexafffund
Harsh Kumar, Taneea S Agrawaal, Kwan Kiu Choy, Jiakai Shi, Joseph Jay Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInfographicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Social mediaHealth communicationInternet privacyPublic healthComputer sciencePublic relationsWorld Wide WebMultimediaMedicineDiseasePolitical scienceNursingInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The World Health Organization (WHO) and other public health agencies have identified vaccine hesitancy as a critical challenge in reducing future cases and deaths from COVID-19. The current study has investigated ways to improve a widely circulated vaccine infographic video by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. After gathering qualitative feedback on properties of the message that could be improved (from online crowdworkers), we conducted a randomized experiment to investigate different combinations of these attributes. Our results suggest participants were more likely to share the video which was: (1) played more slowly; (2) had a female speaker; (3) did not have background music. The study demonstrates potential of user studies for improving existing communication strategies for encouraging vaccinations and alleviating vaccine hesitancy on social media platforms. Our contribution also includes a repository of messages to encourage vaccination, generated by online crowdworkers, which could be utilized by future studies.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended AbstractsSame topicMisinformation and Its ImpactsFrench-language works237,207