MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935177125 · doi:10.1002/mar.20592

“Made in Country” Versus “Made in County”: Effects of Local Manufacturing Origins on Price Perceptions

2013· article· en· W1935177125 on OpenAlexaff
Rajneesh Suri, Mrugank V. Thakor

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Marketing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduct (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)PerceptionSacrificeMarketingIdentity (music)BusinessPsychologyProcess (computing)EconomicsSocial psychologyComputer scienceGeographyMathematicsAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Consumers often use an array of extrinsic and intrinsic attributes to infer product quality and to assess monetary sacrifice. However, literature reveals little about how and if consumers would use information on product's manufacturing origins differently if it was national rather than local. In two studies, the role played by uncertainty in judgments of the quality of locally made products is examined. It is shown that when consumers are motivated to process information and quality ratings are high, local identity effects are elicited and monetary sacrifice perceptions are diminished. These results suggest that favorable quality ratings need to be prominently featured when promoting locally made products, and that locally made products are preferred to national ones only when quality is not a concern.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and MarketingSame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207