MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412861239 · doi:10.5206/elip.v7i1.21625

Information Seeking Behaviour of Voters

2025· article· en· W4412861239 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Library & Information Perspectives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation seekingPsychologyInternet privacySocial psychologyPolitical scienceCriminologyComputer scienceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has experienced a steady decline in voter turnout for the last several decades. The majority of studies have sought to understand how voters use the information, rather than how they find said information. By analyzing the information behaviour of voters during elections using Wilson’s Revised General Model this paper seeks to understand what information barriers voters experience, and how public libraries can lower these barriers. It finds that there are three points of intervention during voters’ information search; the initial activating mechanism, where the barrier is a lack of political knowledge, the second activating mechanism, where the barrier is a lack of perceived self-efficacy, and the active search phase, where the barrier is access to specific information. Public libraries can intervene at these points by providing electoral information, hosting vote pop-ups or registration workshops, promoting media and civic literacy, and hosting public forums and electoral candidate meet and greets. In doing so, public libraries are in a position to mitigate the declining voter turnout by facilitating information seeking.

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.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.009
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.273 · 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