MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617663536 · doi:10.17970/jrem.17.170106.id

ANALISIS PENGARUH PERILAKU KONSUMEN TERHADAP CUSTOMER MISBEHAVIOR DALAM INDUSTRI RETAIL DI INDONESIA (Studi pada Hypermart)

2017· article· en· W2617663536 on OpenAlexaff
Amelia Amelia, Ronald Ronald

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Riset Ekonomi dan manajemen · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsHyperion Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonprobability samplingBusinessMarketingData collectionPersonalityAlienationStratified samplingAdvertisingPsychologySocial psychologyMathematicsStatisticsPopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The retail industry is one of the fastest growing industries in Indonesia, with Hypermart as one of the largest retail companies. As a company engaged in retail then Hypermart provides a variety of consumer goods that the majority of Indonesian people shopping with high frequency at Hypermart. The purpose of this study was to understand the effect of customer behavior in the past and the future customer behavior. In previous studies in various research on consumer behavior, this relationship has not been studied adequately using personality variables were complete. Additional variables used in this study are five variables based on consumer personality is Consumer alienation, Machiavellianism, Sensation seeking, aggressiveness, self-esteem, Past misbehavior, Future misbehavior Furthermore, this study also aimed as a consideration for the managerial or practitioners Hypermart in the decision-making process, in an effort to reduce misbehavior future intentions of customers Hypermart through past efforts to reduce customer misbehavior. The sampling method used in the study to be performed are non-probability sampling. This study used a questionnaire as a major tool in data collection. This research will be used purposive sampling technique. The number of samples in this research are 300 respondents were evaluated, and the data were analyzed using multiple regression with SPSS 16. The results of this study can be used by companies that are facing the problem of customer misbehavior in shaping strategies to reduce customer misbehavior.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Riset Ekonomi dan manajemenSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207