MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011869944 · doi:10.1108/07363760310472236

Which decision heuristics are used in consideration set formation?

2003· article· en· W2011869944 on OpenAlexaff
Michel Laroche, Chankon Kim, Takayoshi Matsui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consumer Marketing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsHeuristicSet (abstract data type)Selection (genetic algorithm)Lexicographical orderComputer scienceDecompositionChoice setProduct (mathematics)MarketingOperations researchMathematical optimizationBusinessMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study empirically investigates consumers’ use of five heuristics (conjunctive, disjunctive, lexicographic, linear additive, and geometric compensatory) in the consideration set formation, a critical first phase before actual choice behavior. Data were collected on the selection of beer brands and fast food outlets by real consumers. Using a decomposition approach in determining the consumers’ choice heuristics, it was found that the conjunctive heuristic is the most often used decision model in the consideration set formation for the two product classes. Implications for brand managers and future research directions are developed.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consumer MarketingSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207