MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247883109 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648283.v1

Something Ordinary to Something Navy- Exploring Influencer Arielle Charnas’ use of Parasocial Interaction Techniques on Instagram

2021· preprint· en· W4247883109 on OpenAlexaff
Lesley Shiner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfluencer marketingInteractivityFeelingOpenness to experienceSocial mediaPsychologyOpinion leadershipSocial psychologyInterpersonal communicationAdvertisingPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research paper is to explore ideas that may highlight why Instagram users may be interested in following the lives and daily activities of social media influencers on Instagram. Social media influencers have been defined as “independent third party endorsers who have developed sizeable social networks by sharing details about their personal lives, experiences, and opinions publicly through texts, pictures, videos” (Ki & Kim, 2019, p. 905). Research also suggests that if successful, influencers can become “opinion leaders who communicate with a sizeable social network of people following them” (Boerman, 2020, p. 199). Arielle Charnas is a New York City fashion influencer with over one million followers on Instagram, and she will be used as a case to study alongside parasocial interaction to explore how, as an influencer, she incorporates techniques from this theory to establish a connection with her followers. This MRP supports research that proposes that the two established parasocial interaction techniques of perceived interactivity and openness “should increase feelings of parasocial interaction” (Labrecque, 2014, p. 136). Moreover, the analysis of Arielle’s Instagram supports the concept that the development of feelings of a parasocial relationship can be enhanced when “media presentations resemble interpersonal interaction” (Perse & Rubin, 1989, p. 60).

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.428
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.058 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedia Influence and HealthFrench-language works237,207