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 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 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.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.123
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