EXPLORING SALES PROMOTION TECHNIQUES AND THEIR EFFECT ON ELECTRONIC BRAND RECOGNITION IN RIVERS STATE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brand recognition plays a pivotal role in the success of electronic stores, particularly in today’s competitive and dynamic retail market. As the electronic retail industry continues to evolve with rapid technological advancements and shifting consumer preferences, establishing strong brand recognition is critical for distinguishing a store amidst intense market competition. Sales promotion techniques have gained significant managerial attention for their ability to enhance brand visibility, engage customers, and drive profitability. These strategies, when well-executed, can help electronic stores build brand loyalty, attract new customers, and ultimately increase sales. However, the effectiveness of sales promotions depends on several factors, such as selecting the right promotional strategies, understanding customer preferences, and determining appropriate discount levels. Failure to align promotional efforts with consumer expectations may result in negative brand perception or reduced customer engagement. This paper examines the role of sales promotions in shaping brand recognition within electronic stores and highlights the challenges and strategies involved in leveraging promotions to achieve a competitive edge. The study further emphasizes the need for a careful balance between promotional activities and brand identity, as an overemphasis on discounts or poorly executed campaigns may undermine the long-term value of brand recognition. The findings suggest that electronic stores must strategically design their promotional campaigns to enhance brand recognition while maintaining a consistent and positive brand image
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".