MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132959260

Youth Radicalization Through Political Parasocial Relationships

2025· dissertation· W7132959260 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alvina G. Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRadicalizationPolitical communicationPoliticsInfluencer marketingPolitical socializationIdeologyVoting behaviorSocial media
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s digital age, political parasocial relationships—one-sided connections individuals form with media personalities—play a significant role in youth political engagement. Traditionally focused on celebrities, parasocial relationships now extend into the political arena, where influencers and politicians leverage social media to engage directly with audiences. This thesis explores how these relationships influence youth political beliefs and behaviors, especially radicalization and ideological reinforcement. Using five in-depth interviews across the political spectrum with young adults who regularly view political livestreamers, the study investigates the dynamics of parasocial relationships in shaping political ideologies. Employing social cognitive theory, the theory of basic human values, and Cialdini's principles of persuasion, the analysis highlights how streamers influence their audiences through identity alignment, perceived authority, and social validation. Findings reveal that political livestreamers foster ideological commitment, influence belief shifts, and contribute to radicalization, raising important implications for political discourse and youth engagement in the digital sphere.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicHumor Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207