Values and collective self‐esteem as predictors of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence among university students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This cross‐cultural study examines inter‐relationships between values (using the list of values), collective self‐esteem (CSE), and consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence (CSII). Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through surveys administered to 783 university students in four countries (Australia, English‐speaking Canada, Korea, and Norway). Findings Results indicate that external and interpersonal values are positively related to the normative component of CSII, while internal values are negatively related to the normative component of CSII. The CSE subscale measuring importance of the group to one's identity is positively related to normative CSII, while the CSE subscale of membership esteem is negatively related to normative CSII. Normative CSII was substantially higher among Korean participants than among participants from the other countries. Research limitations/implications This research was limited to a sample of university students in Canada, Australia, Norway, and Korea. Future research could expand the sample to include a more representative adult sample, in order to ensure the generalizability of the results. Practical implications CSII may be an important factor in many consumer purchases that relate to self‐image. The relationship of values and collective self‐esteem to CSII provides valuable insights to managers regarding consumer purchasing behavior. Originality/value Given that values, consumer self‐esteem, and country explain a large degree of the variation in consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence, managers can benefit from this knowledge when developing advertising content and marketing interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".