Jingle bells or ‘green’ bells? The impact of socially responsible consumption principles upon consumer behaviour at Christmas time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Socially responsible consumption (SRC) behaviours have progressed over the last few years and appear to show signs of a lasting trend. Situations of atypical consumption such as Christmas time, however, raise an important and as of yet unexplored question: What are the influences of unusual situations upon the relationship between people's socially responsible profile and their socially responsible purchase intentions (SRPI)? The objective of this article is thus to use the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, ) and environment‐based variables, called ‘atmospherics’, to answer to this question. A Web survey on a total sample of 301 Canadian consumers, shows that people's past SRC behaviours are positively related to their SRPI in unusual situations. Moreover, the atmosphere of the place consumers are situated in has a negative moderating influence upon this relationship. This result is explained by a change in people's attitude toward SRC. However, this negative moderating effect of atmosphere is contained and constrained by social desirability in the form of subjective norms on SRC and the level of behavioural control consumers perceive.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".