MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125623830 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v3n4p60

DETERMINANTS OF RECENT ONLINE PURCHASING AND THE PERCENTAGE OF INCOME SPENT ONLINE

2010· article· en· W3125623830 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brendan Hannah, Kristina M.L. Acri née Lybecker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersColorado College
KeywordsBusinessAdvertisingPurchasingPopulationMarketingOnline participationOnline advertisingThe InternetDemographicsSocial mediaEntertainmentCredit cardInternet privacyWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePolitical scienceDemographySociologyPayment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent stagnation of electronic commerce highlights the need to understand contemporary online consumer behavior. E-commerce’s slow growth has coincided with an explosion in the usage of Web 2.0 activities. These novel online venues have created many new channels for online retailers to reach buyers, yet these online activities have gone largely unstudied. This study incorporates current user demographics and Web 2.0 activities to dynamically model the determinants of two key measurements of recent online shopping, a recent purchase and the novel dependent variable, percentage of income spent online. Regression analysis is applied to a nationally representative 2007 survey of the U.S. online population. Determinants of a recent online purchase include, ownership of a credit card, PayPalTM account, listening to podcasts, participating in online auctions, and for the first time, female gender. In a second regression, positive determinants for the percentage of income spent online include, male gender, educational attainment, online auctions, instant messaging, and online dating. Online spending increases with time online, and appears to compete with other forms of online entertainment and social networking. These results produce snapshots of contemporary online shoppers that can be used by electronic retailers to determine which product characteristics to highlight for greatest impact, and to efficiently target specific Web 2.0 activities, such as entertainment, podcast and social network websites, to develop new and robust marketing platforms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.309 · 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.

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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207