Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Contemporary consumer culture consists of subcultures that provide meanings and practices that significantly structure the identities, relationships, and behaviors of consumers. These subcultures are closely related to countercultures and often serve as the source of countercultural images and identities. Their countercultural images and identities are often absorbed by the advertising, entertainment, and marketing industries, and eventually become popularized. In consumer research or consumer cultural studies, subcultures have been related to a variety of different consumption activities. The use of the term subculture has been criticized as overly deviant, ambiguous, and overextended; however, many consumer researchers still find the concept useful. A number of related concepts have been developed, such as subcultures of consumption, communities of consumption, brand communities, and microcultures. The term deals with an ambiguous, dynamic, and important social phenomenon. It is also linked to important bases of literature. As long as lifestyle, differentiation, self‐transformation, and small group identities continue to be important aspects of contemporary consumer culture, the concept of subcultures will continue to be both needed and useful.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.275 | 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".