Does diversity facilitate consumer decisions: a comparative perspective based on single-category versus multi-category products
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to explore the opposite effects of single-category versus multi-category products information diversity on consumer decision making. Further, the authors investigate the moderating role of three categories of visitors – direct, hesitant and hedonic – in the relationship between product information diversity and consumer decision making. Design/methodology/approach The research utilizes a sample of 1,101,062 product click streams from 4,200 consumers. Visitors are clustered using the k-means algorithm. The diversity of information recommendations for single and multi-category products is characterized using granularity and dispersion, respectively. Empirical analysis is conducted to examine their influence on the two-stage decision-making process of heterogeneous online visitors. Findings The study reveals that the impact of recommended information diversity on consumer decision making differs significantly between single-category and multiple-category products. Specifically, information diversity in single-category products enhances consumers' click and purchase intention, while information diversity in multiple-category products reduces consumers' click and purchase intention. Moreover, based on the analysis of online visiting heterogeneity, hesitant, direct and hedonic features enhance the positive impact of granularity on consumer decision making; while direct features exacerbate the negative impact of dispersion on consumer decision making. Originality/value First, the article provides support for studies related to information cocoon. Second, the research contributes evidence to support the information overload theory. Third, the research enriches the field of precision marketing theory.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it