MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997507475 · doi:10.1002/cjas.162

The effects of document language quality on consumer perceptions and intentions

2010· article· en· W1997507475 on OpenAlex
Arancha Pedraz‐Delhaes, Muhammad Aljukhadar, Sylvain Sénécal

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSafety Warnings and Signage
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)PerceptionPsychologyBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article establishes a link between language quality in the documentation accompanying a product and consumers' evaluations of, and behavioural intentions towards, both the product and the manufacturer. In a laboratory experiment, 116 participants assembled a product using assembly guides with different language quality levels. Results show that language quality affects document evaluation, which spills over to the evaluations of both the product and the manufacturer. Findings also indicate that the documentation accompanying a product is a vital extrinsic cue used by consumers to evaluate both the product and the manufacturer, which implies that these documents are secondary products that add value to the primary product. Theoretical and managerial implications of these findings are discussed. Copyright © 2010 ASAC. Published by 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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.319 · 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