Fair trade consumption from the perspective of US Baby Boomers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to expand the knowledge base of Baby Boomers’ attitudes, behaviours and perceived barriers related to fair trade purchasing. Design/methodology/approach – This study included 168 Baby Boomers. Data were collected through an online questionnaire. Data analysis included a combination of both quantitative (descriptive statistics, independent samples t-tests and correlation analysis) and qualitative techniques. Findings – Findings indicated that the participants exhibited positive attitudes towards fair trade but were minimally engaged in fair trade purchasing. Furthermore, the participants perceived numerous barriers to purchasing fair trade products including the incompatibility of fair trade merchandise with lifestyles, the inability to touch and see fair trade products prior to purchase and difficulty in identifying fair trade items. Research limitations/implications – A limitation of this study is that the sample was well-educated university faculty and it is not representative of all Baby Boomers. Practical implications – Fair trade entities need to be more effective in marketing the advantages of the fair trade. Fair trade organizations should consider targeting marketing strategies specific to the unique demographic and psychographic characteristics of Baby Boomer consumers. Originality/value – This research expands understanding of the consumer behaviours of US Baby Boomers related to fair trade. An additional contribution is the comparison of differences in fair trade knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of Early vs Late Baby Boomers. It also has potentially important implications for fair trade organizations, as the paper discusses marketing strategies specific to Baby Boomers.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".