MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303645856 · doi:10.1080/15378020.2022.2131965

Consumer evaluation of food truck offerings through image, perceived risk, and experiential value

2022· article· en· W4303645856 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katya Van Embden, WooMi Jo, Mark Robert Holmes, Pengsongze Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Foodservice Business Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)Experiential learningBusinessMarketingRisk perceptionTruckAdvertisingPsychologyPerceptionComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What satisfies food truck patrons? The current study attempted to answer this question by investigating the impacts of cognitive and affective image, perceived risk, and experiential value on customer satisfaction. Further, this paper looked to understand how satisfaction with food truck offerings translates into repurchase intention. To facilitate this research, a panel of Canadian and American food truck customers were surveyed. A total of 421 sample data were retained from online surveys and the relationships among the forementioned variables were analyzed through path analysis. The study findings indicate that a positive food truck image reduces customers’ perceived risk of dining at a food truck and increases the value they believe they can obtain from the operation. Furthermore, finding that reduced perceived risk and positive image and value perceptions can result in increased customer satisfaction and, in turn, increased repurchase intention. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Foodservice Business ResearchSame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207