MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215618261 · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12766

Consumption to compensate for the feeling of “loss of ownership of self” Women’s journeys through the liminal transitions of marriage

2021· article· en· W3215618261 on OpenAlexaff
G. P. Ranjitha, Anandakuttan B. Unnithan, Russell W. Belk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Consumer Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiminalityCognitive dissonanceFeelingSocial psychologySelfPsychologyGrounded theoryPossession (linguistics)Consumption (sociology)Identity (music)Coping (psychology)Transformational leadershipSociologyQualitative researchAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This interpretive study derives a conceptual framework explaining how Indian women experience a loss of self through the transformational event of marriage. The self‐discrepancy of losing one’s self motivates these women to renegotiate their sense of self through consumption. Data were collected through 76 in‐depth interviews analyzed by a constant comparative method and grounded theory. Our research question is to what degree and in what ways do women in India experience a loss of self upon marriage and, if they do, through what consumer practices (if any) do they attempt to compensate for this feeling of loss? Analysis revealed three common stages in Indian women’s married life (1) marriage as a life transitional event inducing liminality (2) loss of Self: dissonance (3) compensatory consumption as a response to dissonance. Our research contributes to life cycle theory by focusing on liminal transitions. We find that self is a possession that women can lose after marriage in India. Based on these findings we argue that understandings of identity and life cycle must be amended to consider self‐discrepancy and coping processes. We develop a model of consumption that results from a perceived loss of self. This is all part of a process of self‐identity reconstruction. We also expand psychological ownership theory to include ownership of self.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Consumer StudiesSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207