MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998864906 · doi:10.1177/0887302x0001800106

Fashion Leaders' and Followers' Attitudes Toward Buying Domestic and Imported Apparel

2000· article· en· W1998864906 on OpenAlex
Pierre Beaudoin, Mary Ann Moore, Ronald E. Goldsmith

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

VenueClothing and Textiles Research Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingAttractivenessAdvertisingMarketingBusinessSample (material)PsychologyQuality (philosophy)Political science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the Fishbein Attitude Model as the conceptual framework, this study investigated whether female fashion leaders and fashion followers differed in the importance they gave to 12 selected clothing attributes and in their attitudes toward buying imported and domestic apparel. A random sample of 641 female consumers completed a mailed questionnaire. Results showed that fashion leaders accorded significantly more importance than fashion followers to six apparel attributes: color, attractiveness, fashionableness, brand name, appropriateness for occasion, and choice of styles. Both fashion leaders and followers accorded similar importance to six other apparel attributes: good fit, durability, ease of care, price, comfort, and quality. Also, fashion leaders as well as fashion followers had more positive attitudes toward domestic apparel than imported apparel. However, compared to followers, fashion leaders had more positive attitudes toward imported apparel.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.261 · 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