MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046273528 · doi:10.1177/1094670504273965

Silent Voices

2005· article· en· W2046273528 on OpenAlex

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 Service Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotiveModerationRedressSituational ethicsComplaintPsychologySample (material)Social psychologyCognitionSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although noncomplaining dissatisfied consumers represent a vast majority of the dissatisfied consumers, they have not yet received adequate attention from marketing researchers. To understand the paradoxical combination of dissatisfaction and absence of complaint, the authors use the Lazarus cognitive-emotive model of coping with situational challenge. They added a moderator, the Seeking Redress Propensity (SRP) to this model and then developed a theoretical model and a set of hypotheses. A sample of consumers who had experienced a negative incident with the bank were administered a questionnaire by telephone. The sample was designed in such a way that half of them had complained and half had not. It was found that SRP is a significant moderator. In addition, SRP is shown to be strongly related to the likelihood of complaining. Lazarus’s model is basically supported, mostly for the customers scoring higher on SRP. Theoretical and managerial implications are proposed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.264 · 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