Gender-based behavioural segmenting of the cellphone youth market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the existence of behavioural segments (clusters) among youth regarding the cellphone communication market in Finland. Specific cellphone behaviours are used as a cluster variate. The cellphone behaviours used are: 'necessity of modern times', 'cost efficiency', 'safety/security', 'dependency', 'negatives' and 'functionality', per Aoki and Downes's (2003) research on cellphone use. Separate behavioural clusters were devised for both males and females on the basis of the behaviours. Four unique behavioural clusters among the male respondents ('middle of the road', 'feature freaks', 'all important', and 'minimalists') and three unique behavioural clusters among the female respondents ('dependents', 'advanced users', and 'cost matters') were detected. Each cluster had a unique group of benefits sought, with no overlapping clusters between genders. After these clusters were identified they were then profiled using age, gender and the behavioural variables as profilers. This research serves to help market researchers and cellphone producers alike better understand how and why cellphones are used in the youth marketplace.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".