MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402126380 · doi:10.1007/s44282-024-00083-3

Power, interests and representations in the construction of alcopop as public problem in Quebec, Canada

2024· article· en· W4402126380 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yannick Masse, Lilian Negura

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Global Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPower (physics)Public powerPolitical sciencePublic administrationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alcopops are malt-based or spirit-based sugary beverages whose consumption has led to numerous policies in different Western countries. This article examines the representational and socio-political dynamics surrounding the sale of alcopops that led to restrictive policies in Canada (2017–2020). Using qualitative methods during this period, including interviews with key players in the field of alcohol policy, analysis of press articles and review of legislative documents, we trace the evolution of public and political discourse on alcopops. We shed light on the role of social actors—mainly public-health organizations and the alcohol industry—defending their own interests to influence policy-making. A multi-theoretical framework is used to analyze how alcopops emerged as a public problem. This framework integrates Herbert Blumer's theoretical perspective on social problems, Serge Moscovici's social representation theory and Stevens and Zampini’s political constellation model. Through an analysis of the socio-political context in Quebec, we reveal the complex interplay between public health imperatives and the interests of the alcohol industry. This should serve as a model to study public problems that lead to public policies implementation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscover Global SocietySame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207