Exploring consumer attitudes to online collaborative consumption: A typology of collaborative consumer profiles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Online collaborative consumption enhances peer networks, members of which communicate, collaborate, and even deliver services to one another via digital sharing platforms. Despite the tremendous increase in collaborative consumption, due in large part to the development of the Internet, the reality of the economic and social movements that underpin this trend is much less visible. Of course, not all consumers seek collaborative consumption or interact through online platforms. Using a qualitative approach, this paper aims to investigate motivational factors and barriers against collaborative consumption and to establish a typology of collaborative consumer profiles, identifying the most suitable type of online sharing platforms for each profile. The findings reveal the following collaborative consumer profiles: committed, pragmatists, intermittent, and skeptical, each demonstrating different preferences for the different type of online sharing platform.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it