Effect of the Perceived Functionality of Non-Prototypical Product on Emotional Appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted as a part of !The study on the relationship of prototypicality of the product and customer adaption". The aim of this study is to research on the effect of perceived functionality on emotional appraisal for different range of prototype concentration in the product category. First through literature review, the definition of prototype and the determinants of prototypicality had been studied. The research has been structured to find the range of prototype concentration in each product category through drawing a prototypical shape. Next, to study the effect of perceived functionality on the emotional appraisal, the change in emotional appraisal on novelty, familiarity, reliability, and preference when image of non-prototypical products from each product category was shown without and with functional description was analyzed. In this study, products are sorted into two types according to the range of prototype concentration. In each type, the certain patterns of change in emotional appraisal were shown when the function of the non-prototypical product was perceived. This study shows the implications for different effects of functional perception on emotional appraisal in non-prototypical products depending on the range of prototype concentration in the product category
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 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".