媒介多样性与质变分析

IF 1.2 Q3 COMMUNICATION
David Deacon, J. Stanyer
{"title":"媒介多样性与质变分析","authors":"David Deacon, J. Stanyer","doi":"10.1177/20570473211006481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Diversity is recognised as a significant criterion for appraising the democratic performance of media systems. This article begins by considering key conceptual debates that help differentiate types and levels of diversity. It then addresses a core methodological challenge in measuring diversity: how do we model statistical variation and difference when many measures of source and content diversity only attain the nominal level of measurement? We identify a range of obscure statistical indices developed in other fields that measure the strength of ‘qualitative variation’. Using original data, we compare the performance of five diversity indices and, on this basis, propose the creation of a more effective diversity average measure. The article concludes by outlining innovative strategies for drawing statistical inferences from these measures, using bootstrapping and permutation testing resampling. All statistical procedures are supported by a unique online resource developed for this article.","PeriodicalId":44233,"journal":{"name":"Communication and the Public","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/20570473211006481","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Media diversity and the analysis of qualitative variation\",\"authors\":\"David Deacon, J. Stanyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20570473211006481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Diversity is recognised as a significant criterion for appraising the democratic performance of media systems. This article begins by considering key conceptual debates that help differentiate types and levels of diversity. It then addresses a core methodological challenge in measuring diversity: how do we model statistical variation and difference when many measures of source and content diversity only attain the nominal level of measurement? We identify a range of obscure statistical indices developed in other fields that measure the strength of ‘qualitative variation’. Using original data, we compare the performance of five diversity indices and, on this basis, propose the creation of a more effective diversity average measure. The article concludes by outlining innovative strategies for drawing statistical inferences from these measures, using bootstrapping and permutation testing resampling. All statistical procedures are supported by a unique online resource developed for this article.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication and the Public\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/20570473211006481\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication and the Public\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20570473211006481\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication and the Public","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20570473211006481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

多样性被公认为评价媒体系统民主表现的重要标准。本文首先考虑有助于区分多样性类型和水平的关键概念辩论。然后,它解决了衡量多样性的一个核心方法挑战:当许多来源和内容多样性的衡量标准仅达到名义衡量水平时,我们如何对统计变化和差异进行建模?我们确定了一系列在其他领域开发的模糊统计指数,这些指数衡量“定性变化”的强度。使用原始数据,我们比较了五个多样性指数的性能,并在此基础上提出了一个更有效的多样性平均测度。文章最后概述了使用自举和排列测试重采样从这些度量中得出统计推断的创新策略。所有统计程序都有一个为本文开发的独特在线资源支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Media diversity and the analysis of qualitative variation
Diversity is recognised as a significant criterion for appraising the democratic performance of media systems. This article begins by considering key conceptual debates that help differentiate types and levels of diversity. It then addresses a core methodological challenge in measuring diversity: how do we model statistical variation and difference when many measures of source and content diversity only attain the nominal level of measurement? We identify a range of obscure statistical indices developed in other fields that measure the strength of ‘qualitative variation’. Using original data, we compare the performance of five diversity indices and, on this basis, propose the creation of a more effective diversity average measure. The article concludes by outlining innovative strategies for drawing statistical inferences from these measures, using bootstrapping and permutation testing resampling. All statistical procedures are supported by a unique online resource developed for this article.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
2.80%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信