MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903188856 · doi:10.5539/jms.v8n4p65

Behavioral Effects of Mortality Salience: An Experimental Study

2018· article· en· W2903188856 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Leila E. Zein, Hussein Akil, Said Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMortality salienceTerror management theoryMaterialismSalience (neuroscience)Consumption (sociology)PsychologySocial psychologyDeath anxietyCognitive psychologyPsychiatrySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study is intended to explain the effect of Mortality Salience (MS) on consumer behaviors. In a first part, we present a state of the art of Terror Management Theory (TMT) and its contributions in management sciences by focusing on the impact of MS on consumption. In a second part, we illustrate the results of an experiment testing the effect of death reminders on consumption choices. The results of the experiment show that the reminders of death generate, for the most part of participants, pro-materialistic consumption choices. Based on these results, we highlight the effect the death reminders can generate on Lebanese consumers.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionFrench-language works237,207