MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975797884 · doi:10.1002/mar.21263

From desire to help to taking action: Effects of personal traits and social media on market mavens’ diffusion of information

2019· article· en· W2975797884 on OpenAlexaff
Isar Kiani, Michel Laroche

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Marketing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)PsychologySocial mediaDiffusionSocial psychologyAdvertisingBusinessWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract While extant research has studied traits of market mavens and the link from mavenism to market helping behavior, there is a need for more research to understand personal and contextual factors that influence actual recommendations of products and differences among market mavens with different traits in that respect. In this study, we took research in the area of market mavenism one step further and investigated the role of personal traits such as self‐esteem and susceptibility to normative interpersonal influence, and the contextual factor of social media, in the frequency of recommendations. We hypothesize that while market mavens with lower self‐esteem are likely to engage in less frequent recommendations, negative effect of their lower self‐esteem is attenuated when they use social media platforms as their medium of choice. Our findings lend support to our hypotheses, including the triple interaction effect between self‐esteem, choice of social media, and market mavenism on market recommendations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.310
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and MarketingSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207