Why are you happy with impulse buying? Evidence from Indonesia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Happiness is an ideal condition needed by everyone. In the real life, happiness comes not only from the harmony in the home but also from the exciting environment or atmosphere outside the home, such as impulse buying. When someone makes impulse buying, she could feel the happiness because she gets something she wants. This means that when someone makes a purchase, she will experience happiness. This study aimed to examine the variables that affect impulse buying which may also affect the happiness. It is assumed that the experience and the pleasant shopping atmosphere affect the impulse buying and, as a result, the impulse buying affects happiness. The samples in this study were 150 women making purchases of fashion products at malls in Surabaya. The hypothesis testing was conducted by using Structural Equation Modelling. The test results indicated the hypothesis 1 stating that the experiential marketing influenced the impulse buying and hypothesis 2 stating that the shopping enjoyment affected the impulse buying were accepted. Further, hypothesis 3 were also accepted, stating that the impulse buying influenced happiness.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it