MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391885277 · doi:10.32920/25233553.v1

The Attitudinal and Behavioural Correlates of Engagement with Ethnocultural Media at the Local Level: A Case Study of Mississauga and Vancouver

2024· preprint· en· W4391885277 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natassja Bilinski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityToronto Public HealthUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnoutPoliticsEthnic groupImmigrationPolitical efficacyMedia usePolitical scienceSocial psychologyPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employing Canadian Municipal Election Study (2018) survey data, this paper examines the majority-minority cities of Vancouver and Mississauga to assess whether there is a correlation between engagement with ethnocultural media and local political participation of immigrant and ethnic electors, who are known to participate at comparatively low rates. This paper asks, first, what are the sociodemographic correlates of those who engage with ethnocultural media? Second, what association is there between engagement with ethnocultural media and local political attitudes and behaviours of interest, efficacy, knowledge, and turnout. The results show that age, education, language, immigrant status, and race correlate with engagement. As well, when individuals consume high levels of ethnocultural media, they are more likely to be interested in and feel a greater sense of efficacy towards local politics. Furthermore, knowledge of local politics alone is shown not to correlate with engagement, and that such engagement has no relationship with turnout.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→