MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388040863 · doi:10.1080/2573234x.2023.2274088

Introducing technological disruption: how breaking media attention on corporate events impacts online sentiment

2023· article· en· W4388040863 on OpenAlexafffund
Dane Vanderkooi, Atefeh Mashatan, Ozgur Turetken

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Analytics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBusinessSentiment analysisComputer scienceData scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One modern strategy to anticipate consumer reaction to new products and services involves looking towards social media sites to explore consumer opinions.A rich body of literature on social media marketing suggests that an effective way to leverage social media platforms is the empirical analysis of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM), particularly through sentiment analysis (SA).We propose a novel method for innovators to leverage social media by exploring how breaking media attention on notable corporate events impacts the general public sentiment surrounding a pre-introduced, potentially disruptive innovation (PPDI).Twitter conversations surrounding Facebook's pre-introduced payment system called Libra, a permissioned blockchainbased cryptocurrency, were analysed as a case study.The analysis suggests that breaking media attention leads to a significant change in sentiment polarity.An event with a preannouncement leads to an emotional momentum effect whereby sentiment polarity accumulates across an anticipation period.Implications for how managers may leverage these insights are discussed.

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)0.011
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business AnalyticsSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207