Situational variables and sustainability in multi-attribute decision-making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine whether consumers demonstrate a multi-dimensional understanding of sustainability in their decision-making and addresses the situational influence of confidence and compromise on sustainable product choices. Design/methodology/approach – Using three choice-based conjoint experiments the authors examined the importance of sustainability, compromise and confidence to consumers across two contexts. Two-step cluster analyses were used to segment consumers based on the importance scores. Findings – Data indicates that the environmental dimension of sustainability is the most influential followed by economic and social. The responses suggest three distinct segments identified as self-focused, trend motivated and reality driven that demonstrate significantly different characteristics in their approach to sustainable products. Research limitations/implications – Current research tends to focus on the environmental dimension, while paying little heed to the economic and social dimensions. This research indicates that consumers consider all three dimensions when making sustainable product choices and highlights that differences may emerge with respect to product utility. Practical implications – Firms must be aware that consumers differ in the importance they place on sustainability. The reality-driven segment is the most attractive segment, as they are highly engaged and are willing to invest time in understanding the complexities of sustainability. The trend-motivated segments are more fickle with superficial knowledge, and the self-focused segments are self-serving in their orientations and use price as a key decision variable. Originality/value – The paper addresses an important oversight in the sustainability literature. It provides both a theoretical contribution to advance marketing research and a practical contribution that may be of interest to those trying to market sustainable products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".