Consumer responses to femvertising: evidence from a cross-cultural study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the moderating role of support for women’s rights and feminist self-identification in the brand-related effects of femvertising in a cross-cultural context. This research investigates how consumers from countries with varying gender equality indices respond to femvertising. A survey was conducted in two countries, Spain, which represents southern Europe and has a higher gender equality index, and Mexico, which represents Latin America and has a lower gender equality index. Two relevant contributions emerged from this study. First, it provides a comparative framework for identifying the main empirical findings on the brand-related effects of femvertising across different cultures. Second, it highlights that in countries with high gender equality, such as Spain, support for women’s rights negatively moderates the relationship between general attitude towards femvertising and evaluations of the presented femvertising messages. This finding suggests that consumers in these regions may be more critical and sensitive to feminist messaging. The practical implications suggest that brands should tailor their femvertising campaigns to align with the socio-cultural context of each market to ensure authenticity and consumer resonance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".