MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399983184 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v14n4p11

Chinese Online Celebrities’ Discursive Strategies of Promoting Domestic Products: Online Posters as Multimodal Ensembles

2024· article· en· W4399983184 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yusa Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvertisingComputer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although Chinese online celebrities have received much scholarly attention, scant studies pay attention to the crucial role they play in promoting the emerging “buy national” in China. This study investigates the multimodal discourse conveyed in a collection of advertising posters designed by online celebrities to promote Chinese domestic products (known as guohuo in China). Through a social semiotic lens, it provides a multimodal analysis of how online posters employ visual imaginary and textual messages for commercial purposes within the rising consumer nationalistic context. Drawing upon a dataset of 20 online posters, the analysis reveals a set of semiotic resources including color, image, typography, layout and non-linguistic gesture and gaze. These modes are employed collectively to orchestrate the national script and produce the authoritative representatives that convert the online posters into a kind of national multimodal ensemble. The study highlights the extensive spread of online posters and provides new insights for analyzing the visibility of online celebrities in the growing wave of “buy national” in China.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207