MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965948174 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v3n6p101

Attractiveness Factors Influencing Shoppers’ Satisfaction, Loyalty, and Word of Mouth: An Empirical Investigation of Saudi Arabia Shopping Malls

2012· article· en· W1965948174 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alaeddin Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttractivenessAdvertisingWord of mouthBusinessMarketingProduct (mathematics)Nonprobability samplingService qualityLoyaltyVariety (cybernetics)Quality (philosophy)Service (business)EntertainmentSample (material)Shopping mallCustomer satisfactionPsychologyComputer scienceMathematicsSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research is to investigate the attractiveness factors influencing shoppers’ satisfaction, loyalty, and word of mouth in Saudi shopping mall centers. The independent variables were attractiveness factors represented by these variables namely aesthetic, convenience and accessibility, product variety, entertainment, and service quality. The dependent variables were shopper satisfaction, loyalty and WOM. A structured questionnaire was distributed to a sample of 600 shopping mall customers, representing all of the shopping malls shoppers in the city of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A purposive sampling technique was employed in this research. The multiple regression analysis showed the impact of shopping malls attractiveness factors on the shopper satisfaction. The attractiveness factors aesthetic, convenience and accessibility, product variety, entertainment, and service quality, had a positive effect on Saudi shopping mall shoppers’. The most significant factor was product variety. This research potentially contributes to shopping malls attractiveness factors and their impact on shoppers’ satisfaction in shopping malls of Saudi Arabia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations89
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207