MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179463522 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v14n8p42

Consumer Purchasing Decision Improvement Model through Brand Image, Religiosity, Brand Ambassador and Brand Awareness

2021· article· en· W3179463522 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingBrand awarenessBrand managementBrand equityBusinessMarketingPurchasing decisionAdvertisingBrand extension

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In several studies, theoretically, companies that have good brand ambassadors will produce good purchasing decisions. However, empirically, it does not guarantee that brand ambassadors are able to produce good purchasing decisions. This gap is interesting to study in depth. Based on theoretical studies and according to the viewpoint of previous research, the concept of brand awareness is expected to be a solution in overcoming research gaps in brand ambassadors and consumer purchasing decisions. Companies that use brand ambassadors that generate good brand awareness are companies that are able to increase consumer purchasing decisions. For this reason, 150 Tokopedia users in Central Java were researched and tested the linkages between research variables. This phenomenon study is expected to contribute to the development of science, especially marketing management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.307 · 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