Brand signal quality of products in an asymmetric online information environment: An experimental study
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
Abstract Previous research regarding the effectiveness of brand name signalling has focused mainly on when and how marketers will recover costs. This study reverses this trend by examining how buyers may interpret signals via the brand name, the effectiveness of signalling via brand name in terms of buyer‐value perspectives and how buyers' reactions to signals affect sellers' decisions to adopt a signalling strategy. Signalling theory and concepts from consumer‐based branding research are used to suggest how to evaluate the effectiveness of signalling via brand name in the context of the consumer market – a market in which information is asymmetric. Findings from a number of repeated experiments, using the methodology of experimental economics, demonstrate that the function of a brand fluctuates according to which market conditions prevail for brand and price, the extent of brand differentiation and the magnitude of brand‐building costs. Copyright © 2011 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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