MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379806067 · doi:10.1515/bis-2021-0048

Against the Frame: Local Media Coverage of Ontario’s Basic Income Pilot

2023· article· en· W4379806067 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBasic Income Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasic incomePovertyNarrativeFrame (networking)State (computer science)Basic needsPolitical scienceThematic analysisSociologyEconomicsEconomic growthQualitative researchEngineeringSocial scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 2017–2018 basic income pilot in the Canadian province of Ontario attempted to alleviate poverty in a precarious economy. With three communities participating, we examine how the pilot was framed by local media, permitting a look at the narratives that were dominant in the participating communities. In essence, were recipients framed as “deserving?” How the media addresses this question can set the foundation for whether policymakers can proceed with basic income. Given that media coverage of poverty alleviation in the United States generally follows an episodic frame, which puts focus on individuals and their particular circumstances (i.e. lifestyle choices), while major Canadian media generally shows a mix of frames, results of a media content analysis at the local level shows basic-income pilot was covered mainly through thematic frames, which emphasizes systemic factors and more general social conditions, which support state action on basic income.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.276 · 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