MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958216863 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v11n3p1

Personal and Social Tipping Norms: Race and Sex Differences

2019· article· en· W2958216863 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jeremy E. Whaley, Wanda M. Costen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPsychology of Social Influence
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)PsychologyNorm (philosophy)Social psychologyMarketingAdvertisingSociologyBusinessPolitical scienceGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tipping is both a personal and social norm, which can also vary according to the consumer’s racial background and sex. This study investigated the extent to which restaurant guests’ personal and social tipping norms vary based on race (White vs. Africa American) and sex. The researchers used a consumer panel comprised of 623 participants in 2016. A two-by-two ANOVA was conducted to examine race and sex effects on personal and social tipping norms. The results demonstrated both main and interaction effects of race and sex in personal and social tipping norms. Based on the results, the researchers discuss implications for scholars, restaurant owners, and managers.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicPsychology of Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207