MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611578468 · doi:10.1002/cb.1653

How identity related goals moderate the role of attributes in product evaluation

2017· article· en· W2611578468 on OpenAlex
Na Xiao

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 Consumer Behaviour · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduct (mathematics)Identity (music)Order (exchange)Construct (python library)New product developmentPsychologyMarketingComputer scienceSocial psychologyBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research examines how identity related goals influence product evaluation. It is proposed that products are evaluated based on an attribute level to fulfill an identity related goal. Further, the positive relationship between an attribute level and product evaluation is strengthened by goal activation (the degree to which a goal occupies a consumer's thinking) and goal‐product fit (the extent to which consumers think a product is related to a particular goal). Results of three experimental studies support the above propositions. The research makes contributions in that it identifies two moderators, that is, goal activation and goal‐product fit, in the relationship between attributes ability and product evaluation. First, identity‐related goals are higher order and likely to have higher priority for consumers. However, results in this paper show that it still needs to be activated before it can exert an influence on attribute importance. Specifically, when an identity related goal (e.g., one supportive of the fair trade goal) is activated, it takes over a lower‐order goal (e.g., seek for a good taste or a good priced coffee in this case). As goal activation increases, relevant attributes become more important, and the positive relationship between an attribute level and product evaluation strengthens. Second, this paper introduces a new construct of goal‐product fit into identity‐related goals and product evaluation literature. The results of study three suggest that when goal‐product fit becomes stronger, the relevant attribute that can fulfill the goal becomes more important in the overall product evaluation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.249 · 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