MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200025553 · doi:10.1111/joca.12434

Understanding consumer stockpiling: Insights provided during the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic

2021· article· en· W4200025553 on OpenAlexaff
Nelson Borges Amaral, Bin Chang, Rachel J. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consumer Affairs · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStockpilePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)BusinessMarketingEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceMedicineVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseaseOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines data collected early in the COVID‐19 pandemic to uncover the underlying factors that are related to consumer stockpiling in response to a global pandemic. A survey of 1325 American consumers from March 27, 2020 to March 29, 2020 revealed that 55.5% of respondents stockpiled. Locus of control (LOC), the extent to which a person believes the environment is controllable and responsive, is associated with the stockpiling decision. More specifically, after controlling for demographic characteristics, consumers with internal LOC are less likely to stockpiling than those with external LOC. We also find that consumers with higher health risk are more likely to stockpile. Together, our results provide valuable insight for practitioners and policy makers who are concerned with understanding and reducing consumer stockpiling during health‐related crises.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consumer AffairsSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207