MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383535770 · doi:10.3390/jtaer18030061

How Streamers Foster Consumer Stickiness in Live Streaming Sales

2023· article· en· W4383535770 on OpenAlexaff
Yongbing Jiao, Emine Sarigöllü, Liguo Lou, Baotao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHumanities and Social Science Fund of Ministry of Education of China
KeywordsIdentification (biology)BusinessAdvertisingMarketingConsumer behaviourLive streamingComputer scienceMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Streamers play a critical role in fostering consumer stickiness in live streaming sales. Thus, it is necessary to make clear the mechanism of how streamers influence consumer stickiness. Based upon the theories of social support, social identification and consumer stickiness, this study investigates the effects of consumers’ perceived emotional support, informational support, financial support, affectionate support and social network support from streamers on consumer–streamer identification, which in turn affects consumer–streamer stickiness and consumer–brand stickiness in live streaming sales settings. Based on the structural equation modeling analysis of 280 online questionnaires, using the software of Smart PLS 3.0, the results demonstrate that perceived emotional support, perceived informational support, perceived financial support and perceived affectionate support enhance consumer–streamer identification, thereby enhancing consumer–streamer stickiness and consumer–brand stickiness, and thus, consumer–streamer stickiness also enhances consumer–brand stickiness. This study not only extends the theories of live streaming sales, but also provides practical implications for enterprises’ improving consumer–streamer stickiness and consumer–brand stickiness in live streaming sales.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce researchSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207