Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 897

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Theoretical Model for the Study of Product Importance Perceptions

Bloch, Peter H., Richins, Marsha L·1983·Journal of Marketing

Abstract

Product importance and related constructs have been inadequately defined and understood in the consumer behavior literature. This paper reviews and integrates these constructs and presents a framework for the analysis of product importance perceptions. Two forms of the construct are identified, and the antecedents of and responses to product importance are specified. Implications for consumer research and marketing management are discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/002224298304700308

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 897

Metadata

Authors
Bloch, P. H., & Richins, M. L.
Venue
Journal of Marketing
Published
1983-06
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
69-81
ISSN
  • 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7185
OpenAlex
W2327470083
Cited by
897
References
1
FWCI
21.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.