MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404724755 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i3.2194

A Conceptual Framework Of Decision-Making By Children As Consumers With Insertion Of Influencing Factors

2023· article· en· W4404724755 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deepali Chaudhary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategies and Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptual frameworkProcess managementPsychologyBusinessComputer scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comprehending consumer buying behaviour and the reasons behind it continues to be important in marketing as it enables companies to improve their marketing strategies and increase company performance. Additionally, during recent years, emphasis has been drawn to children as consumers as well as the variables that affect their purchasing decisions. However, there aren't many studies on the subject. The present paper focuses on providing a conceptual framework based on the previous works of literature published by scholars in regard to children consumer behaviour with the inclusion of factors that shape children’s consumer behaviour and therefore, the purchase decision. For this purpose, established studies provided by Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, Blandína Šramová’s children socialization process, and McNeal’s growth sequence of children consumers have been majorly referred to along with other contributions of different scholars on the same. The framework also tries to explain the cognizance of children towards such influencing factors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicBusiness Strategies and InnovationFrench-language works237,207