Pre-Purchase Online Information Seeking: Search versus Browse.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recognizing the need to support both goal-directed and experiential behaviour in online shopping environments as a means of facilitating flow, this paper reports results from an exploratory study that investigates consumer preferences for Web-based product information display across browsing and searching tasks. Thirty-one participants performed two online shopping tasks (one searching and one browsing in nature) on predetermined e-tailing sites and were asked to evaluate the display of product information on these sites in helping them carry out these tasks. Results suggest three things: 1) information such as pricing, product description, retailer selection, retailer advice, and a good interface design are required in both tasks; 2) searching requires more detailed product information; and 3) browsing places greater emphasis on information about the retailer. Based on these findings, a theoretical framework for Web-based product information display is presented. With respect to the design of Web retailing sites, the study’s results imply the need to focus not only on goal-directed search, but also on non-directed browsing tasks as well. It is argued that adapting the design of e-tailing sites to the unique information display requirements of search and browse tasks could help promote more compelling online shopping experiences for consumers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it