MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296909285 · doi:10.19030/iber.v4i5.3593

Consumer Purchase Motives And Product Perceptions: A Hard Laddering Study Of Smoking Habits Of Poles

2011· article· en· W2296909285 on OpenAlex

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

VenueInternational Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive and psychological constructs research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLadderingPerceptionPsychologyProduct (mathematics)AdvertisingConsumer behaviourSample (material)Market segmentationMarketingSocial psychologyPencil (optics)BusinessMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the study is to apply the Means-End Theory to the analysis of smoking habits of Poles, based on a quota sample of 418 smokers in Krakow. The Means-End Theory posits that consumers learn to associate attributes (A) of products with particular consequences (C), and that these consequences are important because they accord with personal values (V) held by the individual. Each chain of associations A-->C-->V depicts the consumers personal motivations with respect to a given product. The paper-and-pencil assisted approach (which is called hard laddering, as opposed to soft, conventional tape-recorded interviews) is used to uncover links between personal values and the smokers choices. The results are then transposed into a meaningful market segmentation strategy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.182 · 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