MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397042508 · doi:10.1002/mpr.2016

Designing and implementing an experimental survey on knowledge and perceptions about alcohol warning labels

2024· article· en· W4397042508 on OpenAlexaff
Daniela Correia, Alexander Tran, Daša Kokole, Maria Neufeld, Aleksandra Olsen, Tiina Likki, Carina Ferreira‐Borges, Jürgen Rehm

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersWorld Health OrganizationEU4Health
KeywordsPerceptionPsychologyApplied psychologyCognitive psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the design and implementation of an online survey experiment to investigate the effects of alcohol warning labels on alcohol-related knowledge, risk perceptions and intentions. METHOD: The survey collected self-reported data from 14 European countries through two waves of data collection with different recruitment strategies: dissemination via social media and public health agencies was followed by paid-for Facebook ads. The latter strategy was adopted to achieve broader population representation. Post-stratification weighting was used to match the sample to population demographics. RESULTS: The survey received over 34,000 visits and resulted in a sample size of 19,601 participants with complete data on key sociodemographic characteristics. The responses in the first wave were over-representing females and higher educated people, thus the dissemination was complemented by the paid-for Facebook ads targeting more diverse populations but had higher attrition rate. CONCLUSION: Experiments can be integrated into general population surveys. Pan-European results can be achieved with limited resources and a combination of sampling methods to compensate for different biases, and statistical adjustments.

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)0.197
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1970.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.536
GPT teacher head0.689
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric ResearchSame topicSurvey Methodology and NonresponseFrench-language works237,207