MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505703277 · doi:10.1108/13555850810909740

Life‐style orientation of rural US and Canadian consumers

2008· article· en· W1505703277 on OpenAlex
Talha Harcar, Erdener Kaynak

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

VenueAsia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketingDemographicsBusinessFlourishingSample (material)AdvertisingPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose In view of the existing void in the current international and cross‐national/cultural marketing literature, the purpose of this paper is to look into the similarities and differences of life‐style orientations prevalent among US and Canadian consumers. The AIO (Activities, Interest, and Opinions) and VALS (Values, Attitudes, and Life‐Styles) statements adapted from the current cross‐cultural marketing literature were utilized to determine different US and Canadian consumer market segments. The research tools and techniques used in this study help retail businesses as well as manufacturing companies of the two countries to develop and execute more effective target marketing strategies. Design/methodology/approach The data for this study were collected through self‐administered questionnaires. The questionnaires were administered in two different locations. First, in Brandon, Canada and second, in the rural part of south central Pennsylvania (York and Lancaster counties). Both regions are similar to each other, each having a flourishing agricultural industry and a significant number of companies in the service and manufacturing industries. The data were collected through a drop‐off and pick‐up method among a sample of 300 Canadian married or common‐law families and 400 in the USA. Findings The study results show that there are, indeed, differences among the consumers’ life‐styles in the two countries which were similar in demographics and as such may have been previously treated the same way by marketers, but in reality have very different lifestyles. Based on the survey findings, managerial and/or public policy implications are offered for orderly marketing decision‐making purposes. Research limitations/implications A study of total urban consumers may produce different life‐style profiles than the ones presented here. This study only examined North American consumer life‐styles within the framework of product group (form). Additional studies may look at consumer life‐styles by use of product brands and even product options. Originality/value This empirical research study presents cross‐cultural comparisons of life‐styles, value orientations of consumers in the purchase of a variety of goods and services in the similar environments of North America, namely rural areas of the USA and Canada.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.203 · 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