When the frugal become wasteful: An examination into how impression management can initiate the end‐stages of consumption for frugal consumers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Premature disposal of functional products is a global problem adding to waste and feeding a consumer culture. Contrary to this, frugal consumers take care and extend the life of their products, elongating the usage and value obtained from their possessions. Despite this, little is known about frugal consumers and the factors that eventually initiate their actions towards the end‐stages of consumption (e.g., declined usage). The present research explores one such psychological factor that may dictate frugal consumers’ willingness to discontinue usage of their products; impression management. Three studies demonstrate that when the marketplace's opinion of an owned product is negative (e.g., inferior value), then the well‐accepted frugality‐usage intentions relationship diminishes. This effect is due in part to the undesirable image that owning such a product portrays, that of a consumer who makes poor choices. By examining what can initiate the end‐stages of consumption for frugal consumers, this study broadens our understanding of anticonsumption lifestyles postpurchase, exploring factors beyond functionality, and obsolescence that influence decisions to continue or discontinue using products consumers already own.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".