MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013918670 · doi:10.1108/13612020310464340

Fashion innovativeness, fashion diffusion and brand sensitivity among adolescents

2003· article· en· W2013918670 on OpenAlex
Pierre Beaudoin, Marie J. Lachance, Jean Robitaille

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 Fashion Marketing and Management · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnovation diffusionPsychologyEarly adopterSensitivity (control systems)Function (biology)BusinessAdvertisingMarketingBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using Rogers’ theory of diffusion of innovation, this paper reports the results of a study that had two objectives: the first objective was to compare the number of male and female adolescents in each of Rogers’ five categories of consumer adopters. The second, was to verify if there were differences among the five distinct categories of adopters with respect to brand sensitivity. Results show that, as with other market segments, there are more female than male adolescents in the categories “innovators” and “early adopters”, and more male than female adolescents in the categories “late majority” and “laggards”. Further, it appears that brand sensitivity is an increasing function of fashion “adoptiveness” among adolescents.

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)0.000
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 score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · 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