Effects of Supplier Customer Orientation on Buyer Loyalty: A Contingent Process Model Based on Self-Determination Theory
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
Prior supplier-buyer relationship research has identified supplier customer orientation as a driver of buyer loyalty. In this research, we address how and when this effect occurs. Based on self-determination theory, we identify three buyer psychological states—buyer autonomy, buyer competence, and buyer relatedness—that mediate the impact of supplier customer orientation on buyer loyalty. Drawing from prior supplier-buyer relationship scholarship, we identify three contingencies—buyer asset specificity, buyer environmental uncertainty, and buyer reciprocal interdependence—that, respectively, moderate the mediating effects of the three buyer psychological states. Results from a survey of 171 supplier-buyer matched dyads show that the three buyer psychological states are positive mediators of the impact of supplier customer orientation on buyer loyalty. Results also show that while the positive mediating effects of buyer autonomy and buyer competence are respectively strengthened by buyer asset specificity and buyer environmental uncertainty, the positive mediating effect of buyer relatedness is weakened by buyer reciprocal interdependence. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
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 | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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