Cited by 99Text and Document Classification TechnologiesComputational and Text Analysis MethodsTopic Modeling

Machine learning approach to auto-tagging online content for content marketing efficiency: A comparative analysis between methods and content type

Open access
Salminen, Joni, Yoganathan, Vignesh, Corporan, Juan, Jansen, Bernard J., Jung, Soon-Gyo·2019·Journal of Business Research

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.018

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Hong, W., Zheng, X., Qi, J., Wang, W. & Weng, Y. (2018) 'Project Rank: An Internet Topic Evaluation Model Based on Latent Dirichlet Allocation', 2018 13th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE). IEEE, pp. 1-4.
  2. Hong, W., Zheng, X., Qi, J., Wang, W. & Weng, Y. (2018) 'Project Rank: An Internet Topic Evaluation Model Based on Latent Dirichlet Allocation', 2018 13th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE). IEEE, pp. 1-4.
  3. Le, Q. & Mikolov, T. (2014) 'Distributed representations of sentences and documents', International conference on machine learning. pp. 1188-1196.
  4. Machedon, R., Rand, W. & Joshi, Y. (2013) Automatic Crowdsourcing-Based Classification of Marketing Messaging on Twitter: 2013, International Conference on Social Computing. 8-14 Sept. 2013.
  5. Mencía, E. L. & Fürnkranz, J. (2008) Efficient Pairwise Multilabel Classification for Large- Scale Problems in the Legal Domain. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  6. Ramos, J. (2003) Using tf-idf to determine word relevance in document queries. In Proceedings of the first instructional conference on machine learning (Vol. 242, pp. 133-142).
  7. Wallach, H. M., Murray, I., Salakhutdinov, R. & Mimno, D. (2009) Evaluation methods for topic models: Proceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning. ACM.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Salminen, J., Yoganathan, V., Corporan, J., Jansen, B. J., & Jung, S.-G.
Affiliations
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • University of Bradford (GB)
  • Hamad bin Khalifa University (QA)
Corresponding author
Yoganathan, Vignesh
Venue
Journal of Business Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-08
Volume
101
Pages
203-217
ISSN
0148-2963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2941195982
Cited by
99
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 1
FWCI
6.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Business Research (publishedVersion)
  • UTUPub (University of Turku) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Bradford Scholars (University of Bradford) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
multi-label classification, content marketing, online news articles, YouTube content, random forest, k-nearest neighbors, artificial neural networks, cross-platform validation, unstructured data

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review