MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perceived consumer competence of college students: a qualitative exploratory study

2003· article· en· W2022090531 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie L. Lachance

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Consumer Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)Qualitative researchPsychologyPerceptionExploratory researchMarketingPublic relationsSocial psychologySociologyBusinessPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the large sums of money young people spend on goods and services and the huge importance marketers grant to them, it is easy to agree on the very important role they play in today's consumer society. Autonomous role enactment involves the attainment of a certain level of performance which implies certain socially desirable behaviours. However, studies about consumer skills are rather sparse. Consequently, we do not know if young people present the necessary abilities to make educated choices, protecting their own interests and exerting their responsibilities as citizens in the community and by this, contributing to balancing the market forces. The data presented are an extract from the qualitative part of a larger study about the consumer skills of French Canadian college students. Thirteen students, aged from 18 to 22 years old, were recruited in three colleges of the Quebec City area through personal contacts with academic members. They participated in semistructured interviews during the months of November and December 2001. During the discussions, they expressed their perceptions of the skills necessary for being an educated consumer, their own level of competence in this area, the general level of competence of people of their age and that of older adults. They identified the most significant agents in their consumer socialisation and detailed the nature and content of these influences. This information implements research in consumer behaviour from a non‐commercial perspective and has helped to plan the quantitative stage of the study which is presently under way. The study is financed by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Consumer StudiesSame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207