MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1514427261

Consumer behaviour and language: A study of the spectators of the Montreal Canadiens and Montreal Alouettes (Quebec).

2003· book· en· W1514427261 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Robert Sweeney

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvertisingMedia studiesPsychologySociologyBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)Same topicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and IdentityFrench-language works237,207