Consumer behaviour and language: A study of the spectators of the Montreal Canadiens and Montreal Alouettes (Quebec).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was undertaken to investigate whether differences exist between the motivations of English, French, and bilingual-speaking spectators to attend professional sporting events in Montreal, and to examine whether they have different demographic profiles. The researcher also investigated the differences that exist between spectators who attend professional hockey and those who attend professional football games. The Spectator Attendance Questionnaire (SAQ) was developed to study and measure the problem. In all, 581 fans were surveyed from those in attendance at a Montreal Canadiens hockey game (n = 306) and a Montreal Alouettes football contest (n = 275). Subjects were asked to rate the importance of 35 attendance factors on their decision to attend that game. Attendance factors were classified along the five "P's" of the marketing mix, namely: product, price, place, promotions, and public relations. A five-point Likert Scale was used to score the SAQ. Various demographic data were also collected. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2003 .S93. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 42-01, page: 0080. Adviser: James Weese. Thesis (M.H.K.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2003.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".