MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using a Modified Payment Card Survey to Measure Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Fair Trade Coffee: Considering Starting Points

2012· article· en· W2055038021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shang‐Ho Yang, Ping Qing, Wuyang Hu, Yun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Kentucky
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PaymentHumanitiesWelfare economicsPayment cardWillingness to payEconomicsPolitical scienceArtGeographyMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coffee consumption in China has increased rapidly in recent years. This study offers one of the few existing attempts to understand Chinese consumers’ coffee consumption behavior with a special focus on the viability of fair trade coffee in the Chinese market. A modified payment card approach was adopted to elicit consumer willingness to pay (WTP). Survey results suggest a positive attitude toward coffee and WTP for fair trade coffee. This study also explores the potential impact of starting point bias, which has been relatively well documented in the dichotomous choice literature, but less thoroughly in a payment card context. La consommation de café en Chine s’est accrue rapidement au cours des dernières années. La présente étude figure parmi les quelques tentatives déployées pour comprendre le comportement de consommation de café des consommateurs chinois et se penche sur la viabilité du cafééquitable sur le marché chinois. Nous avons utilisé une méthode modifiée de la carte de paiement pour déterminer le consentement à payer des consommateurs. Les résultats de notre étude montrent une attitude positive envers le café et un consentement à payer pour obtenir du cafééquitable. L’étude se penche également sur l’impact probable du biais de position initiale, qui est assez bien documenté dans la littérature sur le choix dichotomique, mais qui l’est moins dans le contexte de la carte de paiement.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.032 · 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

Citations36
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207