MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Questioning Media Responsibility during Terrorism

2014· book-chapter· en· W4235646810 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud M. A. Eid

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in human and social aspects of technology book series · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismRationalityPublic relationsPoliticsPolitical scienceQuality (philosophy)Management scienceBusinessEngineering ethicsPsychologyLawEngineeringEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The media's dual role during times of terrorism can be as useful as the most effective security and political counterterrorism measures and can be as harmful as exacerbating terrorist events to the worst humanitarian disasters. Media decision-making processes, therefore, are integral to achieving more desired outcomes. This chapter questions the effectiveness of media performance during times of terrorism through the examination of their decision-making processes in terms of rationality and responsibility. The numerous media decisions that are usually made under severe stress during times of terrorism require adherence to both ethical standards and rational thinking. Strategic and goal-directed decision-making that is based on rational choice approach and game theory can help enhance the quality of media decisions. Ethical and socially responsible media performance is fundamental for effective communication. Interweaved, responsible and rational media decision-making are integral to the effectiveness of media decision-making during times of terrorism towards achieving more desired outcomes.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in human and social aspects of technology book seriesSame topicPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationFrench-language works237,207