Les liens attachants : Mesurer la force de l'attachement émotionnel des consommateurs à la marque
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les recherches existantes suggèrent que les consommateurs peuvent être très fortement attachés émotionnellement à des objets de consommation, y compris à des marques. Cependant, aucune échelle pour l'instant ne mesure la force de l'attachement émotionnel des consommateurs vis-à-vis des marques. Nous développons une telle échelle dans les études 1 et 2. L'étude 3 concerne la validité interne de l'échelle et sa structure dimensionnelle. L'étude 4 concerne la validité convergente en prenant en compte quatre indicateurs comportementaux de l'attachement. L'étude 5 montre la validité discriminante de l'échelle, mettant en lumière que l'échelle se différencie des mesures de satisfaction, d'implication et d'attitude envers la marque. Cette dernière étude examine également la validité prédictive de l'échelle, montrant qu'elle est positivement associée aux indicateurs de l'engagement et de l'investissement. Les limites de l'échelle et les conditions nécessaires à son application sont également discutées.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".