MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390581452 · doi:10.1080/02508281.2023.2295621

Coffee culture unravelled: exploring the coffee shop experience model in the Vietnamese context

2024· article· en· W4390581452 on OpenAlexaff
Oanh Thi Kim Vu, Abel Duarte Alonso, Thanh Duc Tran, Wil Martens, Lan Thi Ha, Trung Thành Nguyễn, Erhan Atay, Mohammadreza Akbari

Bibliographic record

VenueTourism Recreation Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicService and Product Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoffee shopThrivingRealmMarketingBusinessVietnameseContext (archaeology)Product (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)Variety (cybernetics)AdvertisingSociologySocial sciencePolitical scienceComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amidst the captivating realm of the coffee shop experience, this study contributes to its significance across various literature streams and diverse forms. More specifically, the study focuses on the concept of the ‘ideal coffee shop experience’ from the perspectives of consumers and coffee shop owners/managers in Vietnam, drawing upon the experience economy and experience co-creation literature. The investigation takes place in Vietnam, a country renowned for its coffee exports and thriving coffee shop industry. Through qualitative data collected via interviews and an online questionnaire, the study uncovers divergent preferences between the supply and demand sides regarding the coffee shop's physical environment, product quality and variety, service staff performance/traits, and location or parking availability. Building on these findings, the study proposes the ‘supplier and consumer coffee shop experience’ model, which offers a comprehensive understanding of coffee shop experiences and provides valuable insights for practitioners and researchers in the relevant fields.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.150 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTourism Recreation ResearchSame topicService and Product InnovationFrench-language works237,207