MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

College students’ consumer competence: a qualitative exploration

2004· article· en· W1988874674 on OpenAlex
Marie J. Lachance, Nadia Choquette‐Bernier

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Consumer Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionCompetence (human resources)PsychologySocializationQualitative researchConsumer educationSocial psychologyMarketingSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate college people's perception of the competence necessary to play the consumer role and of the different socialization agents and processes involved in their consumer learning. Perception of the meaning of consumer competence seems mostly based on characteristics associated to preventive behaviours. If, on the whole, the subjects think they are competent consumers, their perception of other consumers is much less favourable. The mother appears to remain the most influential socialization agent but the father seems to play an increasing role. Young people's consumer socialization process is mainly achieved through communication, observation, and by learning through trial and error. Some of them find that consumer education in high school was useful but boring, and some others didn’t remember having received this education. The need to study further the competence of young adults and to provide consumer education is discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.292 · 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