Influence of Shopping Orientation and Store Image on Patronage of Furniture Store
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
Knowledge on furniture consumers’ retail patronage will promote and enhance efforts to increase sales atfurniture stores and could guide future research. This research therefore was proposed to develop a generalmodel of retail patronage and to empirically test the relationships proposed in the model in the context offurniture market. The objectives of the study include 1) is to review existing retail patronage models and relatedliterature 2) to develop a general framework of retail patronage behavior and 3) to test the model in the furniturestore shopping patterns. Based on a review of the literature the study proposed to adapt Darden’s patronagemodel of consumer behavior. 115 data were collected through survey questionnaires and the underlyingrelationship among the variables that characterize consumers’ patronage behavior towards furniture was studied.Statistically it was found that in terms of shopping orientation, the apathetic shopper and the personalizingshopper was influenced by the lifestyle of the consumer and hence influenced the customer patronage. Storeimage on the other hand was found to enhance the impact on consumer patronage of the furniture store andmoreover acted as both the predictor and the moderator.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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