Indian Consumer Purchasing Behavior towards Branded Processed Food
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to provide comprehensive approach to the consumer purchasing behavior towards branded processed food. There are four broad objectives formulated and subsequently hypothesis was tested to find out the behavior of consumers on purchasing of branded processed food. Variables considered are brand attributes, brand endorsement, brand equity, ethical concerns and demography. We found trust and safety are the two vital parameters drives brand towards consumers. Even though there are other parameters influences consumers but trust and safety creates major influential thing on consumer mind. Age of the consumers are having little impact on purchase of brands over others. Companies can drive their sales philosophy based on trust and safety if they want to establish reliable brand in the long run. This study was carried out in major cities like Chennai, Bangalore, Cochin and Hyderabad in INDIA and may not represent the whole part of the country. Also cities only considered to pick out samples so the result will not reflect the entire population of India. Since not many of the consumer behavior research considered key determinant factors of purchase towards the food purchase. There are multiple variables considered to carry out the study in a comprehensive way-First of its kind in Indian population scenario.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".