Fashion Innovativeness in India: shopping behaviour, clothing evaluation and fashion information sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>There are limited empirical studies that have focused on apparel consumers in India, and none of the previous research has explicitly examined the relationship between fashion innovativeness, consumers’ shopping behaviour, product evaluative cues and fashion information sources. This study is intended to address this research gap. A self-administered survey was used for this study. In total, usable data were collected from 230 female participants aged from 18 to 25 years in New Delhi, India. The results indicated that fashion innovators spent more money on new clothes and shopped more frequently online/offline per year than did fashion non-innovators. Garment fit and comfort were perceived as the two most significant cues for both consumer groups. Fashion innovators relied more often on impersonal or marketer-dominated sources – for fashion information including magazines, store/window displays and celebrities, while fashion non-innovators were more reliant on personal or non-marketer-dominated sources including parents, friends and siblings.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".