MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412883020 · doi:10.1080/09593969.2025.2540767

Determinants of mall attractiveness: meta-analytical review and future directions

2025· article· en· W4412883020 on OpenAlexaff
Omar Fares, Tony Hernandez, Joseph Aversa, Christopher Daniel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttractivenessBusinessMarketingAdvertisingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The resilience of physical malls in the digital age is a testament to their adaptability and unique value proposition as entertainment and social hubs. This research aims to explore the determinants influencing mall attractiveness by conducting an exploratory meta-analysis. It focuses on four key themes: mall patronage, loyalty, experience, and attitudes toward malls, seeking to understand the critical factors driving mall patronage. The study employs an exploratory meta-analysis to systematically review and synthesize existing literature on mall attractiveness. By examining previous research, it identifies and categorizes the significant determinants impacting consumer behaviours and perceptions of malls. Key findings reveal that behavioural intentions, customer support, emotional and psychological factors, merchandise and product-related aspects, service quality, social factors, utilitarian value, and mall environment and atmospherics significantly influence mall patronage and loyalty. The study also highlights the role of socioeconomic status through a moderator analysis in influencing mall attractiveness. The research presents a Mall Attractiveness Value Framework (MAVF) to guide mall management and marketers in creating appealing and engaging environments. This study contributes to the retail literature by providing empirical insights into the dynamics of mall attractiveness amidst the increasing debate about the ‘death of the mall.’ The MAVF offers a unifying perspective on the drivers of mall attractiveness and suggests future research directions to address emerging challenges and opportunities in the retail landscape.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer ResearchSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207