MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286641888 · doi:10.54691/bcpbm.v20i.942

The Effects of Social Media on Consumer Engagement in Chinese Women’s Football

2022· article· en· W4286641888 on OpenAlexaff
Junyan Guo, Jiayi Ni, Yihan Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueBCP Business & Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootballPromotion (chess)SWOT analysisLeagueSocial mediaStrengths and weaknessesAdvertisingPublic relationsPerspective (graphical)PsychologySociologyPolitical scienceMarketingBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the Chinese women’s national football team won the women’s Asian Cup in 2022, it attracted people’s attention back to Chinese women’s football. However, this attention did not last long. Insufficient attention has always been a challenge for Chinese women’s football, especially from a marketing perspective. This study aimed to explore how the social media promotion of the Chinese Women’s Super League (CWSL) impacts consumer engagement. This paper applied the theory based on several literature reviews on the social media effect as an influential factor in consumer engagement. SWOT analysis was used to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for the CWSL. This research concluded that deficiency in social media promotion is the reason that leads to low attention, utilizing social media to promote CWSL affects consumer engagement to a larger extent if appropriate strategies are used. Thus, it revealed the importance of social media’s effect on CWSL’s consumer engagement. These findings can provide considerable strategies for the development of CWSL.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBCP Business & ManagementSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207