MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989998381 · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2015.01.002

The Impact of Market Competition on Search Advertising

2015· article· en· W1989998381 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Interactive Marketing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetition (biology)BusinessSearch advertisingAdvertisingMarket competitionIndustrial organizationOnline advertisingEconomicsComputer scienceThe InternetWorld Wide WebMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although search advertising has gained popularity in recent years, research on the content of search advertising is scarce. This study develops a conceptual framework to understand how market competition affects what a firm advertises in its search ads. Search advertisements from two industries (i.e., hotel and car industries) are used to test hypotheses developed from the conceptual framework. The findings indicate that in a highly competitive market (1) firms engage in more price advertising in their search ads and (2) intermediaries are more likely to increase price advertising in their search ads than brand suppliers. More interestingly, competition from intermediaries and brand suppliers has different effects on the content of search advertising by intermediaries and brand suppliers. These findings enhance the understanding of firms’ behaviors in determining their search advertising content based on the intensity of market competition.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.283 · 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