MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046997474 · doi:10.1068/a45229

Standing out in the Crowd: The Rise of Exclusivity-Based Strategies to Compete in the Contemporary Marketplace for Music and Fashion

2013· article· en· W2046997474 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian J. Hracs, Doreen Jakob, Atle Hauge

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and Space · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsSWORDMonopolyProduction (economics)Competition (biology)Economic rentConsumption (sociology)MarketingSpace (punctuation)BusinessAdvertisingPromotion (chess)GentrificationSociologyEconomicsMarket economyEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geographers have studied the complex relationships between cultural production, consumption, and space for some time, but the marketplace for cultural products is being reconfigured by digital technologies and broader societal trends. For producers of fashion and music the contemporary marketplace is a double-edged sword featuring lower entry barriers and fierce competition from an unprecedented number of producers and ubiquitous substitutes. Global firms and local entrepreneurs struggle to stand out in the crowd and command monopoly rents for their unique goods and services. This paper examines how independent cultural producers use ‘exclusivity’ to generate attention and distinction. Drawing on qualitative research with independent musicians and fashion designers in Toronto, Stockholm, Berlin, and New York it presents three mechanisms through which exclusivity can be created. These include exploiting consumer demand for uniqueness, enrolling consumers into the production and promotion process, and manipulating physical and virtual space.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations84
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and SpaceSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207