MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375844241 · doi:10.1111/joss.12837

How do people communicate about sensory descriptors in social media? An investigation comprising floral descriptors, four beverages, and thirteen English‐speaking countries

2023· article· en· W4375844241 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sensory Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaAdvertisingThe InternetWineGeographyPsychologyComputer scienceBusinessArtWorld Wide WebVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The internet has become a mainstay of modern‐day life, with people worldwide using social media platforms to discuss ideas and exchange opinions. In recent years, social media platforms have become a data source for research focusing on consumers' natural and spontaneous lexicons. The increased use of social media and virtual meetings means people can exchange ideas, and cultural boundaries have blurred. Thus, this study aims to investigate how culture influences the use of the beverage descriptor “floral” on social media for four different beverages when people share the same language. A social media study was performed, collecting data over 1 year in 13 English‐speaking countries: Australia, Canada, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Singapore, New Zealand, and seven Caribbean Islands. Words associated with four beverages (beer, cocktails, tea, and wine) and floral were filtered on social media mentions. A total of 258,221 mentions were obtained from different types of social media such as Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and so forth. The mentions were filtered to obtain the frequency of words by country. Each beverage was analyzed separately, and contingency tables were arranged by country and descriptor. A correspondence analysis was performed on each contingency table to identify relative similarities and dissimilarities between the countries in the study. Overall, rose was the most cited floral descriptor, and there was a link between beer and wine descriptions. However, for cocktails and tea, the floral descriptors varied per country. Thus, it suggests that the impact of culture on the use of floral descriptors depends on the beverage being discussed. Practical Applications The results obtained in this study have relevance for people interested in sensory and specifically in beverage descriptions, as well as those involved in the alcohol industry, particularly those involved in beer and wine, and the non‐alcohol industry (tea). These results can drive the construction of applied and effective marketing strategic plans for the beverage and flavor industry in the areas covered by the study.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.203 · 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