MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparative View of Citizen Engagement in Social Media of Local Governments From North American Countries

2018· book-chapter· en· W4231144342 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
María del Mar Gálvez-Rodríhuez, Arturo Haro de Rosario, María del Carmen Caba Pérez

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityDisseminationSocial mediaPolitical sciencePublic relationsDimension (graph theory)Relation (database)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taking into consideration the growing popularity of social media in North American countries, this chapter aims to perform a comparative analysis of the use of Facebook as a communication strategy for encouraging citizen engagement among local governments in The United States, Canada and Mexico. With regards to the three dimensions used in all regions to measure online citizen engagement, in general terms, the “popularity” and “virality” dimensions are the most common, while the “commitment” dimension is still underutilized. With respect to the significant differences found, Mexican citizens are those that make the best use of the tool “like” to express their support of the information supplied by local governments. Furthermore, in relation to the citizens that are fans of the Facebook pages of local governments, we can observe that Canadian citizens show a greater interest in participating more actively in dialogue building while U.S. citizens are the most willing to disseminate information from their local governments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicE-Government and Public ServicesFrench-language works237,207