MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391692012 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ad22b7

Vulnerable voices: using topic modeling to analyze newspaper coverage of climate change in 26 non-Annex I countries (2010–2020)

2024· article· en· W4391692012 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy McAllister, Siddharth Vedula, Wenxi Pu, Maxwell Boykoff

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperClimate changeClimatologyEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyEconometricsGeographyPolitical scienceEconomicsGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract News media influence how climate change is represented, understood, and discussed in the public sphere. To date, media and climate change research has primarily focused on Annex I countries, or treated non-Annex I countries as a homogenous bloc, despite the global nature of climate change and its geographically uneven impacts. This study uses a mixed-method approach, combining machine learning (topic modeling), econometrics, and qualitative analyses, to investigate newspaper coverage of climate change in 26 non-Annex I countries. We compiled a dataset of 95 216 news articles (dated between 2010 and 2020 from 50 sources) in 26 lower-middle and upper-middle income non-Annex I countries. In line with previous research results, we find that most common topics represented are international governance of climate change, the economics of energy transitions, and the impacts of climate change. Advancing current research understanding, we also demonstrate heterogeneity in coverage between non-Annex I countries and discover that a country’s vulnerability to climate change is positively associated with the diversity of topics (based on an article-level entropy index) portrayed by its domestic news media outlets.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207