Exploring the Feelings and Thoughts that Accompany the Experience of Consumption Desires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Desires represent a central aspect of human motivation. Recent studies in the field of consumer behavior have shown the importance of the concept of desire to better understand the aspirations of consumers living in economically developed countries for whom most basic needs are satisfied. There has been however no previous attempt at circumscribing the feelings and thoughts that accompany the experience of desire. The present research addresses this gap in the literature. The objectives of the research presented in this article are threefold: (1) to identify the affective and cognitive responses that accompany the experience of consumption desire, (2) to develop a valid scale to assess these feelings and cognitions, and (3) to explore the theoretical links that these internal responses have with other concepts of interest in the field of consumer behavior, such as impulsive and compulsive buying, materialism, innovativeness, voluntary simplicity, self‐esteem, and life satisfaction. In order to address these objectives, five studies were conducted. The results of these studies have revealed that the experience of consumption desires is generally accompanied by psychological events that are affective (i.e., pleasure, discomfort, and guilt) and cognitive (i.e., control). This research contributes to a better understanding of the phenomena that surround the experience of consumption desires as lived and managed by consumers through the development of a reliable and valid measuring instrument that can be used to explore the relationships between these phenomena and other fundamental consumer behavior concepts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".