MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376640558 · doi:10.1002/agr.21819

Communication in times of crisis: Information flow among Chinese hog producers during the African swine fever outbreak

2023· article· en· W4376640558 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shijun Gao, Carola Grebitus, Troy G. Schmitz

Bibliographic record

VenueAgribusiness · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGenome Canada
KeywordsOutbreakChinaFace (sociological concept)BusinessProbit modelPhoneSocial mediaCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Ordered probitSocioeconomicsDiseaseGeographyEconomicsBiologyPolitical scienceVirologySociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The outbreak of African swine fever (ASF) had an enormous economic and social impact on Chinese hog producers. Using a face‐to‐face survey with hog farmers from two regions of China, Chongqing, and Hebei, this research investigated how social influence affects producers’ behavior under disease outbreak using social network analysis. It was analyzed how information flows during an epidemic, such as ASF. Results indicate that hog producers used phone and text more frequently to communicate during the epidemic than before. Face‐to‐face meetings with other hog producers and sales agents decreased during the ASF epidemic—potentially leading to isolation. Moreover, the frequency of face‐to‐face meetings with veterinarians decreased for farmers living in a village in Hebei but remained the same for hog producers in Chongqing. This suggests that the desire to have less face‐to‐face meetings was being replaced with the demand for more help regarding hog health from veterinarians when hog producers lived farther away from each other compared to those living closer together. Employing a random effect ordered probit model, these results were further validated, showing that hog producers dramatically reduced their communication frequency with others after the outbreak of ASF. Findings provide insights into how information flows and how actors communicate during a situation of crisis. [EconLit Citations: D71, D85, Q12, Q18].

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)0.004
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgribusinessSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207