Consumer demand as a driver of improved working conditions: the ‘Ergo-Brand’ proposition
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
This article develops and explores the 'Ergo-Brand' proposition, which posits that consumers may prefer to buy goods that are made under good working conditions (GWCs). This preference would enhance a differentiation strategy for companies, thereby fostering the application of ergonomics in production. This proposition is developed in the context of a narrative review of the literature on 'ethical consumerism'. This is supplemented with a survey study, conducted in both Canada and Sweden (n = 141) to explore this proposition. Results indicate that consumers would prefer goods made under GWCs, but not unconditionally as quality and price concerns were ranked higher. Access to information on the working conditions in production was seen as a barrier. Nevertheless, the Ergo-Brand concept may be a viable avenue in promoting attention towards ergonomics in companies - particularly if consumer habits are subject to intervention by advertising. Further research on this strategy is warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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