MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408459123 · doi:10.4324/9781003412397-17

Collaborative and creative consumption

2025· book-chapter· en· W4408459123 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Myriam Ertz, Gautier Georges Yao Quenum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSharing Economy and Platforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)ArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rise of individualism and modernism, a strict divide appeared between consumption and production so that individuals ended up confined to passive consumer roles. Concomitantly, postmodernism and a renewed sense of community fostered by digital channels such as websites, apps, platforms and social media blurred that distinction. With hybridized forms of exchange intertwining consumption and production/distribution, individuals reclaimed a more active stance that is also more meaningful. This chapter delves deeper into that process and its implications for sustainability. The text opens with an introduction outlining the historical evolution from modernism to postmodernism and the changes incurred by marketing over that period. After discussing the modernism-postmodernism divide, the text introduces the opposition between individualism and collective approaches to life and consumption. This serves as conceptual foundations to the subsequent discussion on the collaborative economy and its counterpart collaborative consumption. Both approaches are then connected to the broader concept of the circular economy (or circularity in the economy) to demonstrate the relevant link between renewed forms of consumption and sustainability. With the acknowledgement of consumers’ greater diversity of roles, the last section outlines the rise of the creator economy and creative consumption before wrapping up with a conclusion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSharing Economy and PlatformsFrench-language works237,207