MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280492694 · doi:10.1080/00913367.2022.2066035

Significant Objects: How Eudaimonic Narratives Enhance the Value of Featured Products

2022· article· en· W4280492694 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 Advertising · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeEudaimoniaPsychologyVirtueFlourishingSocial psychologyValue (mathematics)Product (mathematics)Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)AdvertisingSociologyEpistemologyBusinessLiteraturePhilosophyComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eudaimonic narratives, which past work identifies as stories featuring themes related to virtue and life’s higher purpose, are increasingly prevalent in advertisements and marketing communications. The current research examines whether this type of narrative achieves advertiser-desired outcomes. If these outcomes are achieved, how? The results from five studies demonstrate that eudaimonic narratives enhance the value of, attitude toward, and purchase intentions for products featured in the story. This occurs because the product becomes a symbol for the meaningful theme communicated in the narrative. The effect of eudaimonic narratives on valuation is stronger when a product is central to the narrative plot and when consumers have experienced a threat to their worldview coherence; the effect disappears when people consider giving the focal product as a gift.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.234 · 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