MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783002478 · doi:10.1002/jcpy.1029

Can Everyday Brands Be Threatening? Responses to Brand Primes Depend on Childhood Socioeconomic Status

2018· article· en· W2783002478 on OpenAlexafffund
Jodie Whelan, Sean T. Hingston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consumer Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusPsychologyEveryday lifeNorm (philosophy)Low incomeSocial psychologySociologySocioeconomicsPopulationPolitical scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current work investigates whether childhood socioeconomic status influences how people respond to brands. Results from two experiments show that, perhaps counterintuitively, everyday brands—and not luxury brands—can threaten the self‐esteem of people who had poor childhoods. Supported by the results of our pilot study, we argue this is because everyday brands represent a material norm that can be difficult for low‐income consumers to achieve. Furthermore, our findings suggest that consumers from poor backgrounds may cope with this threat by becoming morse self‐interested, as indicated by decreased volunteer intentions.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.288 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consumer PsychologySame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207