MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124870005 · doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.3.349.18865

The Role of Market Efficiency Intuitions in Consumer Choice: A Case of Compensatory Inferences

2001· article· en· W3124870005 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marketing Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnobservableCounterintuitiveInferenceExtant taxonEconometricsEconomicsProduct (mathematics)Consumer choiceMicroeconomicsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors examine consumer inferences about product attributes that are unobservable at the time of the decision. Extant research predicts that in the absence of an explicit correlation between product attributes, consumers will infer that the brand that is superior on the observable attributes is also superior on the unobservable attributes. The authors propose an alternative inference strategy that makes the counterintuitive prediction that the apparently superior brand is inferior on the unobservable attributes. The authors refer to these inferences as “compensatory inferences” and assert that they are associated with consumers' intuitive theories about the competitive nature of a market. In a series of four experiments, the authors examine the occurrence of compensatory inferences and compare them with other inference strategies.

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 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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.194 · 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