UNGDOMAR OCH DERAS UPPFATTNINGAR AV MODEVARUMÄRKEN : En studie av varumärkena Gucci, H&M och Canada Goose bland gymnasieelever i Stockholm.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Title: Teenagers and their perception of fashion brands (Ungdomar och deras uppfattningar om modevarumärken) Number of pages: 42 Author: Louise Kindblom Tutor: Göran Svensson Course: Media and communication studies C Period: Autumn term 2007 University: Division of Media and Communication, Department of Information Science, Uppsala university Purpose/Aim: To achieve a deeper level of knowledge and a better understanding of high school teenager`s perception of the three fashion brands Gucci. H&M and Canada Goose and too distinguish potential gender related differences in their perceptions. Material/Method: A questionnaire about fashion brands delivered to three schools in the Stockholm area. Main results: Teenagers perceptions of the three fashion brands Gucci, H&M and Canada Goose are more different than similar. This differences in teenagers perceptions are discernible in a comparison between the most usual and unusual associations that are related to each of the brands. Gucci is associated with success, wealth, excitement and uniqueness. H&M is for example seen as earth-bound and has in a comparison with the other brands reached the highest level of positive associations. Canada Goose is seen as dishonest, and has the highest level of negative associations. Gucci and H&M are the strongest brands. They are strong regarding different aspects. Canada Goose is the least strong fashion mark. There are differences in perceptions of gender but they are quite seldom very big even if there are exceptions from this rule. The differences are more subtle. Keywords: fashion brands, teenagers, perceptions, strong brands, associations, image, Kellers pyramid
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".