MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792520784 · doi:10.1177/1469540518764247

Emotion and consumption: Toward a new understanding of cultural collisions between Hong Kong and PRC luxury consumers

2018· article· en· W2792520784 on OpenAlexafffund
Annamma Joy, Russell W. Belk, Jeff Jianfeng Wang, John F. Sherry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consumer Culture · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHong Kong and Taiwan Politics
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)Nexus (standard)Embodied cognitionConspicuous consumptionSociologyResentmentIdentity (music)Competition (biology)Luxury goodsPoliticsSocial psychologyPolitical economyPsychologyAestheticsEconomicsAdvertisingPolitical scienceBusinessSocial scienceEmerging marketsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Incorporating Illouz’s theory of emotions, this study examines how specific emotions drive consumption, as embodied by escalating conflicts between Hong Kong and the PRC luxury consumers. When affluent Mainlanders pursue status signifiers via consumption of relatively affordable luxury goods in Hong Kong, local residents’ disdain triggers a nexus of emotions: envy, resentment, and status anxiety, linked to fears of being occupied by and assimilated into Chinese culture. Deploying cultural capital and status competition rooted in imagination and refinement, Hong Kongese contrast their knowledge-based use of luxury brands with the avid consumption of PRC visitors, fueled by often extreme wealth. For Hong Kongese, such one-upmanship degenerates into self-doubt and self-failure in their image management attempts, precipitating intense hostility toward PRC consumers. Emotions engender colliding notions of self, status, and cultural and political identity between these disparate yet intertwined cultures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consumer CultureSame topicHong Kong and Taiwan PoliticsFrench-language works237,207