MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PROCESSO DE DECISÃO DE COMPRA DOS CONSUMIDORES DE SERVIÇOS DE TV POR INTERNET: O CASO NETFLIX

2019· article· pt· W2903845362 on OpenAlexaff
Fernanda Meneses de Oliveira, Luíz Marcelo Antonialli

Bibliographic record

VenueReuna · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsLambton College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesBusinessMobile marketingComputer sciencePhilosophyAdvertisingDigital marketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este trabalho teve como objetivo compreender o comportamento dos consumidores em relação aos serviços streaming oferecidos pela Netflix no Brasil e nos Estados Unidos, utilizando o modelo do processo de decisão de compra proposto por Blackwell, Miniard e Engel (2011). Para alcançar os objetivos estabelecidos, foi realizada uma pesquisa qualitativa de caráter descritivo, com base em fontes bibliográficas, dados secundários e análise de 61 entrevistas em profundidade com assinantes da Netflix, sendo 38 entrevistados no Brasil e 23 nos Estados Unidos. Para a análise das entrevistas optou-se pela técnica de análise de conteúdo por categoria e comparativa entre os respondentes dos dois países. Os resultados obtidos mostraram que, comparativamente o comportamento dos consumidores dos Estados Unidos e do Brasil, percebe-se que existem diferenças que ocorreram principalmente na etapa do consumo, no que se refere à maneira com que os usuários utilizam o serviço e em relação a disponibilização de títulos diferenciada. As estratégias de marketing utilizadas pela Netflix para concorrer no mercado de entretenimento de TV, filmes e séries se concentram na maneira como o conteúdo é disponibilizado, no preço e na praticidade oferecida.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReunaSame topicBusiness and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207