Perception of Consumers’ Awareness about Sustainability of Fashion Brands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consumers’ perception, awareness, and behavior toward sustainable fashion were surveyed with a questionnaire in which 263 respondents participated, and obtained data were primarily analyzed using descriptive statistics and t-test. The focus of this research was consumer attitudes toward sustainable business practices of fashion brands. Based on the conducted research, differences were found between sexes in the perception of their own awareness of sustainability in fashion, where women consider their own awareness to be higher than men’s. The perception of fashion sustainability awareness in women younger than 35 and those over 36 was also examined. The research showed a gap between consumers’ awareness, their positive attitude toward sustainable fashion, and a lack of action in that direction when making purchasing decisions. The results of these studies provide a better understanding of one’s own perception of awareness in terms of fashion sustainability and various connected factors, as well as difference in both sexes’ awareness of these factors, which may influence consumer behavior related to sustainable fashion products. Thus they can facilitate the implementation of relevant strategies in the fashion industry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".