MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066512469 · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.10.001

Calories, beauty, and ovulation: The effects of the menstrual cycle on food and appearance‐related consumption

2012· article· en· W2066512469 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consumer Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsBeautificationConsumption (sociology)Menstrual cycleLuteal phaseBeautyPsychologyFood consumptionProduct (mathematics)OvulationAdvertisingEconomicsMedicineBiologyBusinessFollicular phaseAgricultural economicsEndocrinologyPolitical scienceSociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The menstrual cycle has been largely ignored within the consumer research literature. Using a survey panel, women's food and appearance‐related consumption was tracked for 35 consecutive days. As predicted, food‐related desires, dollars spent, and eating behaviors were greater during the luteal (non‐fertile) phase, whereas appearance‐related desires, dollars spent, and beautification behaviors increased during the fertile phase. Dollars spent on products unrelated to food or beautification were not significantly influenced by the menstrual cycle. Hence, women's consumption desires, preferences, and dollars spent in evolutionarily relevant product categories (food and mating) fluctuate across their ovulatory cycle. Branding‐related implications are briefly discussed.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.307 · 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