MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7019121514

Estratégias e política de comunicação em universidades federais brasileiras: uma análise do uso do Facebook

2021· article· en· W7019121514 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunication and COVID-19 Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Citizen journalismStrategic communicationQuarter (Canadian coin)Work (physics)Key (lock)Strategic planningSocial media
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communication Policy is an essential instrument of dialogue and relationship. It allows the
\norganization to direct all its work in the area of communication in a participatory manner. This
\nstudy aimed to understand how Brazilian federal universities have built their communication
\npolicies. In this process, the institutions have been taken social media into account, especially
\nFacebook. This study has seven stages: identification of universities with Communication
\nPolicy; identification of universities' online performance; participation of universities on
\nFacebook; analysis of Communication Policies; interview with key university people;
\ninterpretation of data and confrontation with theory and elaboration of a technical manual. The
\ndifferent angles of analysis collaborated in solving the problem of this research. Despite the
\nrelevance of a Strategic Communication Policy, even as a guide in managers' decision-making
\nprocess, this study found that less than a quarter of federal universities had such a formalized
\ndocument, reinforcing this research's importance. Regarding the Strategic Communication
\nPolicies analyzed in this research, innovation, technology, social networks, and social media
\nare still few addressed. It is worth noting that the universities that more explored social media
\ncontent are the ones that presented the best results in public communication and public
\nparticipation indexes on Facebook after implementing the Strategic Communication Policy.
\nThis research also provides a manual with guidelines for those institutions willing to implement
\na strategic instrument. Such practice could strengthen the organization's image and improve
\nvisibility, credibility, and confidence before its stakeholders. Also, in institutionalizing a
\nStrategic Communication Policy, it is possible to evaluate the different subjects that relate to
\nthe organization and obtain a greater rapprochement with these actors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.268 · 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