MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Used Durables and Online Buying: An Attitudinal Study of Indian Youth

2014· article· en· W2345298076 on OpenAlex
Surjit Kumar Kar, Monalisa Bhoi

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Marketing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketingQuarter (Canadian coin)Exploratory researchSampling frameBusinessService (business)PerceptionDescriptive statisticsValue (mathematics)AdvertisingPsychologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present paper is an empirical paper based on an online survey conducted in the first quarter of the year 2013. Preliminary findings were presented at an international conference in the last quarter of 2013, and changes were made based on suggestions received from the co-delegates. The study attempts to investigate the attitude, perception, and motivation of Indian youth, especially management students, regarding their adoption of a distinguished selling/ buying online platform for used laptops through a consumer to consumer discount e-commerce portal. With an exploratory research design, this paper uses multivariate analyses to draw perceptual mapping of the proposed portal vis-à-vis other e-commerce sites. It simulates a business model with an integrated value chain from acquisition and selling of used laptops at a discounted price to a value added after sales/ post purchase service in a committed manner. A focus group discussion was carried out initially among the sampling units from the sampling frame of a management college to understand the antecedents. Based on the findings, a questionnaire was developed and pre-tested through a survey design. Across its two stages, the research used both exploratory and descriptive design in sequence. The second part of the research helps in conceptualizing an optimum marketing mix, and explaining differentiation and positioning variables for the commercial launch of such a venture. However, the current paper discusses only the first part of the study.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.255 · 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