MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408991917 · doi:10.54254/2753-7064/2024.21653

How Does Lululemon Shape Its Brand Loyalty Through Influencing Public Perception of Healthy Female Body Aesthetics on YouTube?

2025· article· en· W4408991917 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Humanities Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Perception and Purchasing Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionAestheticsBrand loyaltyLoyaltyAdvertisingPsychologyArtBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In modern marketing, social media and brand marketing have gradually established an inseparable relationship. This study aims to discuss how brands shape public aesthetics and build brand loyalty through social media. For this reason, this work has diversified research methods. Advanced machine learning algorithm was applied to deeply dig the audience comments of Lululemon's advertising videos on YouTube and analyze the emotional tendency of the collected comments with the help of natural language processing. This work also conducted content analysis on Lululemon's most popular advertising videos on YouTube as a sample. The results show that excellent video content not only increases the stickiness bet these woken brands and consumer, but also improves consumers' purchase intentions. These results show that in the modern market, brands should pay more attention to the quality of social media content to enhance brand loyalty, and they should also be able to obtain consumer needs from user comments, which provides an important sentence for further improving marketing.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.132 · 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