MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522224374 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v8n5p1

Loyalty Typologies and Consumer Choice Factors in the Online Sports-Betting Industry: An Explorative Study into the Italian Regulated Market

2016· article· en· W2522224374 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paolo Calvosa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketingPurchasingLoyaltyBusinessAdvertisingConsumer choiceConsumer behaviourLoyalty business modelEmpirical researchService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper analyses the loyalty typologies and consumer choice factors in the regulated online sports-betting industry. From the methodological viewpoint an empirical investigation has been carried out through the administration of a questionnaire towards customers who make sports bets on online gambling sites in the Italian regulated market. We have found that, in keeping with consumers’ behaviour “regularities” which normally characterize frequently purchased consumer goods markets, the number of customers who are exclusively loyal to one gambling website is rather limited and that, therefore, online bettors mostly adopt a “multi-brand” buying behaviour. In the markets in which this behaviour pattern emerges, customer loyalty programs appear less efficacious in increasing market penetration of the companies with respect to the firms’ decisions on marketing mix-inputs that influence consumer choice of purchasing. The empirical investigation has therefore permitted us to single out the factors that influence the decision to bet at one online gambling site over another, and to show how the importance of these factors varies in relation to the different degree of the gamblers loyalty. The results are then applied to marketing strategies of the online gambling operators.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207