MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999949321

Digital News Report (Ireland) 2023

2023· book· en· W6999949321 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDublin City University Open Access Institutional Repository (Dublin City University) · 2023
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal case studies and regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)JournalismNorthern irelandEuropean unionData collectionEu countries
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global Reuters Digital News Report was commissioned by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford.Here in Ireland the researchers from Dublin City University have regular input into the topics surveyed in the report and we analyse the data that are specific to Ireland, and to our selected comparative markets. The global report survey was conducted by YouGov using an online questionnaire at the end of January/beginning of February 2023.In Ireland 2035 people were surveyed using representative quotas for age, gender, region, and educational level.The data were weighted to targets based on census/industry accepted data. A repoll was conducted in Ireland in late March 2023 as YouGov missed a brand in the 'reach numbers offline' .We have only used the repolled data to deliver a number for the specific missing brand.All other numbers are taken from the January/February poll. This year instead of comparing ourselves with the EU market, we now compare ourselves to the same 'Europe' category as in the global report, meaning the 24 countries sampled by YouGov, including countries such as Norway and the UK. For comparison between 2022 and 2023, we have extracted the Europe data rather than the EU category data so that the comparison is straightforward.If data are used from pre-2022, then the comparison involves EU countries. We have also decided to change from a comparison with North America to a comparison with the US by itself.We felt that the North America data were diluted in some topics by having Canada in the equation.Once again for easy comparison with 2022, we have extracted the US data rather than the North American data so that the comparison is straightforward.If data are from pre-2022, then the comparison involves North America. Regarding this type of polling, it should be noted that online samples tend to under-represent the news consumption habits of people who are older and less affluent, meaning online use is typically over-represented and traditional offline use is under-represented.Our data are representative of the 92% online population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDublin City University Open Access Institutional Repository (Dublin City University)Same topicLegal case studies and regulationsFrench-language works237,207