MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416400343 · doi:10.5539/ies.v18n6p19

The Development of Digital Content on the Metaverse Combined with Interactive Communication Activities with Professional on TikTok Marketing for Students

2025· article· W4416400343 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amornrat Kittipongpisut, Pornpapatsorn Princhankol, Kuntida Thamwipat, paitoon Kantunyaluk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployee Performance and Leadership
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)PerceptionDigital contentQuality (philosophy)Simple random samplePresentation (obstetrics)MetaverseContent analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to 1) examine the needs for developing digital content on the metaverse 2) develop and evaluate the quality of digital content on the metaverse combined with interactive communication activities 3) compare the perception of the sample group before and after viewing the digital content, and 4) assess the satisfaction of the sample group with the digital content and activities. The tools used in the study include a needs survey, content and presentation quality evaluation forms, perception assessment, satisfaction assessment, and the digital content with interactive activities, which the researcher developed, consisted of 26 posters and 8 video clips. The sample group included 48 third-year students from the Department of Educational Communications and Technology, who registered for ETM 358 Marketing Communication in the second semester of 2023. Simple random sampling was used, selecting students who had previously viewed the content and were willing to respond to the survey. Statistical analysis involved mean, standard deviation, and t-test. The results showed that the sample group's demand for developing digital content with communication activities was at the highest level. Based on this, the digital content on the metaverse, combined with interactive communication activities with professional, was developed and evaluated by experts. The content quality was rated at a very good level, while the presentation quality was rated at a good level. Perception assessment after viewing the content and activities showed a significant improvement (p < .05), and satisfaction was rated at the highest level.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEmployee Performance and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207