MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7143821619 · doi:10.38140/com.v19i0.1007

Out-of-home advertising media: theoretical and industry perspectives

2014· article· W7143821619 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. T. Roux, D. L. R. Van der Waldt

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunitas · 2014
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvertising researchNative advertisingAdvertising account executiveDiversity (politics)Advertising campaignKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Out-of-home (OOH) advertising media traditionally have not accounted for a large share of advertising budgets, but overall expenditure has grown considerably in recent years. Due to the transformation of the OOH advertising media landscape, and the diversity and ubiquitous nature of these media, there seem to be a discrepancy between the views of academic and industry experts on exactly what constitutes contemporary OOH advertising media. This article addresses the identified academic-practitioner divide by presenting both sides of the coin. An integrative review of OOH advertising media taxonomies in prominent academic sources, as well as specialists’ industry publications from Canada, South Africa, America, Australia, Ireland and the United Kingdom, was conducted. This resulted in a new conceptualisation of four key platforms for a contemporary OOH advertising media classification framework: outdoor advertising, transit media advertising, street-and-retail-furniture advertising, and digital and ambient OOH media. Clear direction for future research was given, specifically testing the proposed conceptualisation, the impact of OOH audience environments and mood on message delivery, and digital OOH advertising as one of the fastest growing media types.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0040.018
Scholarly communication0.0200.013
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunitasSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207