Analyzing the community decision making to purchase pet insurance: Case study of animal lovers in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to measure people's decision-making to buy their pet insurance and compare it with the amount of insurance premium rates offered. It is important due to the increase in people's income which has triggered the birth of a community of pet lovers as part of the middle-class people’s lifestyle in Indonesia. The survey data was conducted using the Stated Preference (SP) format through questionnaires and interviews to determine the public response to pet insurance premiums. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive methods, decision-making analysis was on the basis of the choice of the dichotomous Contingent Valuation Method (CVM), and logistic regression analysis. Based on the calculation analysis using the logit method shows that the ability of the public to pay pet insurance premiums is IDR289,454.54. Analysis of calculations using the Turnbull method was obtained at IDR365,000.00. The results of the WTP amount, both using the logit method and using the Turnbull method, are greater than the minimum premium amount offered which is IDR190,000.00. The results of this study indicate that the premium rates for pet insurance offered are still within reasonable limits, compared to the size of the decision-making by the animal lover community in Indonesia. This provides a very good prospect for insurance companies that have insurance products for pets in Indonesia. This study was conducted to provide empirical evidence that the decision-making of the animal lover community is greater than the premium rate for pet insurance that has been offered. Thus, this research strongly supports the development of pet insurance companies in Indonesia, which can provide pet protection to stay healthy and well looked after.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".