MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112494977 · doi:10.1080/09593969.2020.1838316

Looking backwards to move forwards: assessing the informativeness of mobile shoppable video

2020· article· en· W3112494977 on OpenAlexaff
David E. Williams, Jennifer R. Sedgewick, Jane Caulfield

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Computer scienceDigital marketingDigital contentMobile deviceDigital mediaContent (measure theory)MultimediaAdvertisingWorld Wide WebBusinessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For both marketing professionals and researchers, what is shiny and new continues to captivate. The latest ‘it’ thing that marketers are gravitating towards is shoppable video where brands and retailers emphasize, entertain and engage consumers with mobile content that is directly ‘shoppable.’ In this new temporal and spatial interactive context, this study dissects the informative content of shoppable videos to develop an initial and comprehensive understanding of mobile shoppable videos. A content analysis of 200 shoppable videos utilizing emotional soft-sell type appeals, utilitarian hard-sell type appeals and humor appeals indicates that utilitarian-focused hard-sell shoppable videos dominate this new landscape thus creating a mobile shopping experience that relies on a hard-sell approach. Under an evolutionary perspective, the content of mobile shoppable videos or ‘digital direct-response ads’ was then compared to the content of direct-response infomercials to account for the modernization bias of digital marketing and explore how the informativeness of shoppable videos evolves and adapts over time. Findings suggest that mobile-designed creative executions adapt the hard-sell standard and feature significantly fewer mentions of price, special offers and guarantees, new ideas, and company research as they contextually adapt. It shows in the future-obsessed digital arena, old and dreary formats can conceptually and practically inform ‘next generation’ ‘revolutionary’ formats, which provides a foundation for future research into mobile shoppable video and updates marketing best practices.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.355 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer ResearchSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207