The Consumer Dilemma Resolved!: The Significance of Purchase Choices in Succeeding in the Wedding Organizer Services Competition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine the effect of service quality and price on customer satisfaction mediated by purchasing decisions for wedding organizer services. This study uses a quantitative approach with a random sampling method. Data collection techniques in this study, use questionnaire techniques, and the measurement scale used is the Likert scale. The population and sample in this study were consumers who had used wedding organizer services totaling 100 respondents. The results showed that service quality and price, as well as purchasing decisions affect customer satisfaction, service quality, and price affect purchasing decisions, service quality and price affect customer satisfaction through purchasing decisions as mediation. Based on the results of the hypothesis, the value of service quality on customer satisfaction is greater than the hypothesis of service quality on customer satisfaction through mediation of purchasing decisions, this indicates a partial mediating effect. Price has a positive and significant effect on customer satisfaction through the mediation of purchasing decisions, based on the results of the price hypothesis, the value on customer satisfaction is greater than the price hypothesis on customer satisfaction through the mediation of purchasing decisions, this indicates a partial mediating effect. This research is interesting because of the different approach, considering the price aspect according to the client's needs and budget rather than a fixed package. In addition, this research shows that staff should empathize with clients, which has been lacking.
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".