MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593256108 · doi:10.1002/pa.1416

The power of popularity: how the size of a virtual community adds to firm value

2012· article· en· W1593256108 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Affairs · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularitySocial mediaBusinessMarketingValue (mathematics)Brand communityBrand loyaltyAdvertisingLoyaltyVirtual communityBrand managementBrand equityThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Customers are increasingly consuming and talking about products and services on online social networks. Thus, these online brand communities have become more important to marketers in their quest to increase future sales through loyalty and customer acquisition. Social media environments, such as Twitter and Facebook, seem to increase consumer loyalty by increasing the popularity of the brand, allowing marketers another way of differentiating. This paper fills a gap in the marketing literature by examining the effect of online brand communities on firm value by using information from the 2010 and the 2006 editions of the Fortune 500 listing as well as key statistics from Facebook and Twitter. The regression models presented show that there is a positive relationship between social media investment and firm value, especially in mature, highly competitive industries, especially for business‐to‐consumer industries. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.260 · 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