A structural look at consumer innovativeness and self‐congruence in new product purchases
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Consumer innovativeness and new product purchasing literatures are replete with solid yet unrelated theories that have not been considered simultaneously as part of a larger psychological framework. This oversight limits the ability of practitioners to effectively target the valuable consumer innovators market segment. In this study, an approach/avoidance framework of new product purchase intentions is discussed and empirically tested via structural equation modeling. Consumer innovativeness, self‐congruence, and satisfaction play the role of approach mechanisms, while perceived risk acts as an avoidance mechanism. The authors combine a set of related yet disconnected theories, while suggesting a means of appealing to consumer innovators through a specific form of self‐congruence. A sample of 741 students is employed to examine these issues. Several notable findings are highlighted, including verification of indirect relationships between the independent variables and behavioral intent. Model fit is excellent and results are consistent across the handheld devices, home entertainment, and music industries. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it