Shaping hedonic-utilitarian attitudes and consumer Intentions: The determinant role of the indulgence vs. restraint culture dimension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper utilizes the newly developed individual-level scale for the indulgence vs. restraint cultural dimension to test a conceptual model examining its role as a determinant of hedonic and utilitarian attitudes and its impact on word-of-mouth (WOM) and repurchase intentions. The model explores the mediating role of positive post-purchase emotions on the influence of indulgence vs. restraint on hedonic and utilitarian attitudes. It also serves as a nomological framework for the newly developed individual-level indulgence vs. restraint scale. Using data from two product and service contexts (restaurant and car/cellphone, n = 458 Canadian and American respondents via MTurk), the results reveal that both hedonic and utilitarian attitudes mediate the relationships between individual-level indulgence vs. restraint and WOM and repurchase intentions, with stronger mediation for hedonic attitudes. Positive post-purchase emotions further mediate the relationships between indulgence vs. restraint and both attitudes. Sweetspot analysis was applied to enhance causal inference and reliability of mediation relationships. The study provides insights for aligning resources, communication, and marketing strategies with diverse customer needs across product and service settings.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".