MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343112991 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v9n5p180

Grocery Retailing in India: Online Mode versus Retail Store Purchase

2016· article· en· W2343112991 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masood H. Siddiqui, Shalini Nath Tripathi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessMarketingPurchasingValue (mathematics)LoyaltyPerceptionConfirmatory factor analysisBrick and mortarAdvertisingStatisticsMathematicsPsychologyComputer scienceThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-retailing is entering into the Indian retail scenario in a noticeable way and online grocery retailing holds a promise of acceptance by the Indian customers. This paper attempts to discover the market potential of online grocery retailing in India and consumers’ perception towards its different aspects. Confirmatory factor analysis proposes that there are five underlying dimensions (convenience, value for money, variety, loyalty and ambient factors) governing the selection of mode for grocery purchase. Thereafter Binary-Logistic Regression has been employed to analyze the impact of these five broad perceptual dimensions upon the acceptance/rejection of online grocery retailing. The respondents accorded the highest importance to the factors value for money and convenience. The study suggested that issues like meeting customer expectations and preferences in terms of delivering value for money, quick and convenient purchasing, smooth delivery process, and reducing risk perceptions are critical for establishing online grocery retailing as an effective alternative to traditional brick and mortar retailing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207