MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132289179 · doi:10.25300/misq/2014/38.3.01

Know Yourself and Know Your Enemy: An Analysis of Firm Recommendations and Consumer Reviews in a Competitive Environment1

2014· article· en· W2132289179 on OpenAlex
Wael Jabr, Zhiqiang Zheng

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMIS Quarterly · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)AdversaryProduct (mathematics)Context (archaeology)MarketingBusinessAdvertisingComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviews and product recommendations at online stores enable customers to readily evaluate alternative products prior to purchase. In this context, firms generate recommendations referring customers to a wider variety of products. They also display customer-generated online reviews in order to facilitate evaluation of those recommended products. This study integrates these two IT artifacts to investigate consumer choice vis-à-vis competing products. We use a dataset we collected from Amazon.com consisting of books, sales ranks, recommendations, reviews, and reviewers. We derive the granular impact of reviews, product referrals, and reviewer opinions on product sale dynamics within a competitive market using comprehensive econometric analyses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it