MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adolescents’ brand sensitivity in apparel: influence of three socialization agents

2003· article· en· W2070868828 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie J. Lachance, Pierre Beaudoin, Jean Robitaille

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
KeywordsSocializationClothingPsychologyContext (archaeology)Social psychologyAdvertisingDevelopmental psychologyBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wearing clothes with prestigious brand names seems to be very important for adolescents. This phenomenon was studied in the context of consumer socialization by examining the influence of three socialization agents, namely parents, peers and TV, on the development of French Canadian adolescents’ brand sensitivity and their relative importance. Controlling for socio‐economic variables, multiple regression analyses were conducted separately for boys and for girls. For both genders, brand sensitivity is related to peer influence. Girls’ brand sensitivity is related to the importance fathers give to clothing brands. TV exposure is not related to adolescents’ brand sensitivity. For boys and girls, peers represent the most important predictor of this consumer socialization. The results are discussed in the light of social and economic pressures and family relationships.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations192
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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