MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075741334 · doi:10.1002/mar.20146

Consumer reactions to crowded retail settings: Cross‐cultural differences between North America and the Middle East

2006· article· en· W2075741334 on OpenAlexaff
Frank Pons, Michel Laroche, Mehdi Mourali

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Marketing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmusementCrowdsCrowdingContext (archaeology)AdvertisingMarketingService (business)PsychologyConsumer behaviourCross-culturalMiddle EastBusinessSocial psychologySociologyGeographyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Most of the research dealing with consumer–consumer interactions emphasizes the negative consequences of sharing the service experience with other consumers. Crowding, in particular, represents one of the important environmental factors affecting consumers' retail experience. However, recent studies in the context of hedonic services (e.g., amusement parks, concerts, etc.) have mentioned that crowds may potentially enhance consumers' service experience. The present study aims at demonstrating the presence of these positive consumer responses in a crowded hedonic situation, while investigating the influence of cultural differences in crowd‐related issues. With the use of consumers from different cultures (North America and the Middle East), reactions to similarly crowded situations in a hedonic situation are compared. Results suggest that Middle Eastern respondents perceive both a lower level of density and appreciate crowded situations more than their North American counterparts. Potential explanations are discussed. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations114
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and MarketingSame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207