MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970899492 · doi:10.1002/bse.2380

The effect of greenwashing on online consumer engagement: A comparative study in France, Germany, Turkey, and the United Kingdom

2019· article· en· W2970899492 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
İbrahim Topal, Sima Nart, Cüneyt Akar, Alptekin Erkollar

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Strategy and the Environment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenwashingSocial mediaAdvertisingQuarter (Canadian coin)BusinessKingdomPolitical scienceCorporate social responsibilityGeographyPublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The effect of the Volkswagen emission crisis in 2015, the biggest greenwashing event in recent years, on the online consumer engagement of Facebook brand pages was investigated in France, Germany, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. These countries have been selected for the reason that Volkswagen sales and diesel‐engine cars and the use of social media are quite common. For 6 years in these four countries, the likes, comments, and shares made by consumers on the Facebook brand page of Volkswagen have been examined. The monthly dataset covers January 2012 to December 2017. The obtained data were analyzed with autoregressive–moving average models. Despite a globally positive approach to green products, countries' attitudes toward greenwashing have been significantly different. The findings showed that online consumer engagement was negative in the United Kingdom and Turkey and in a positive direction in Germany, whereas there was no change in France in the fourth quarter of 2015.

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)0.003
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations73
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness Strategy and the EnvironmentSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207