MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741098917 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v9n4p38

Show Me the Money: On Predicting Actual Purchases in Cross-National Sponsorship

2017· article· en· W2741098917 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
N. Zaharia, Simon Brandon-Lai, Jeffrey James

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratitudeCollectivismHofstede's cultural dimensions theoryMarketingIndividualismGlobalizationStructural equation modelingDimension (graph theory)BusinessAdvertisingPsychologySocial psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The improvements in new media technologies in conjunction with the expansion of innovative opportunities for marketing and consuming sport have played direct roles in the globalization of sport. However, those in the Sport Management academic field are still trying to understand the effect of culture on sport consumer behavior. Guided by Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory, the purpose of this study was to examine the sponsorship and cross-national relationships among the short-term/long-term orientation and individualism/collectivism cultural dimensions, attitude toward a sponsor, gratitude, purchase intentions, and actual purchases. Data were collected via longitudinal web surveys conducted with soccer fans from the United States, the United Kingdom, and India. The results from a structural equation model provided evidence that the individualism/collectivism cultural dimension had a significant effect on gratitude but not on actual purchases, and that the purchase intentions variable was a predictor of actual purchases.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 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 venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207