MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317819136 · doi:10.1108/jhrm-08-2013-0052

Forgotten classics

2014· article· en· W2317819136 on OpenAlex
Stanley J. Shapiro

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

VenueJournal of Historical Research in Marketing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMacromarketingContext (archaeology)Value (mathematics)SituatedOriginalityEconomyState (computer science)MarketingHistoryEconomicsSociologySocial scienceBusinessArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to retrospectively review what is considered to be a forgotten classic in the marketing literature, Marketing in the American Economy , published in 1952 by Roland Vaile, ET Grether and Reavis Cox. Design/methodology/approach – Marketing in the American Economy is summarized, situated in its historical context and retrospectively evaluated by the author including commentaries by other scholars today. Findings – The book’s legacy or continuing value is described as including an insightful discussion of the relative roles of the market and the state in the American economy. The closing three chapters of Marketing in the American Economy merits inclusion in any contemporary “history of marketing thought” course. Finally, Marketing in the American Economy is an early example of a textbook on macromarketing making it a significant contribution to the history of marketing thought. Originality/value – Marketing in the American Economy was reviewed when it was published in 1952. With the benefit of time passed, a more meaningful appraisal of this book can now be made with a focus on its legacy.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.222 · 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