Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The diffusion of mobile services is one of important technological phenomena of the twenty-first century (Dholakia & Dholakia, 2003). According to the International Telecommunication Union,1 the number of mobile service users had exceeded 1.5 billion individual subscribers by early 2005. This represents around one-quarter of the world’s population. The introduction of .mobi, a new toplevel domain,2 is expected to further facilitate the usage of mobile services. Because of their high penetration rates, mobile services have received cross-disciplinary academic attention (e.g., Ruhi & Turel, 2005; Serenko & Bontis, 2004; Turel, Serenko & Bontis, 2007; Turel, 2006; Turel & Serenko, 2006; Turel & Yuan, 2006; Turel et al., 2006). While the body of knowledge on mobile services in general is growing (Krogstie, Lyytinen, Opdahl, Pernici, Siau, & Smolander, 2004), there seems to be a gap in our understanding of a basic, yet important service that mobile service providers offer, namely mobile portals (m-portals). M-portals are wireless Web pages that help wireless users in their interactions with mobile content and services (based on the definition by Clarke & Flaherty, 2003). These are a worthy topic for investigation since, in many cases, they represent the main gate to the mobile Internet and to wireless value-added services (Serenko & Bontis, 2004). Particularly, users of premium wireless services typically employ m-portals to discover and navigate to wireless content such as news briefs, stock quotes, mobile games, and so forth. Given this, m-portals have a strong value proposition (i.e., a unique value-added that an entity offers stakeholders through its operations) for both users and service providers. These value dimensions, which drive the implementation and the use of m-portals, are explored in the subsequent sections. Despite that a number of publications solely devoted to the topic of m-portals already exist, there are very few works that not only present the concept of mobile portals, but also portray their characteristics and discuss some of the issues associated with their deployment by service providers and employment by individual users. The value proposition of mobile portals was rarely explored in depth, and some motivational factors for developing and using mobile portals still remain unclear. To fill this gap, this article explores value proposition of mobile portals from both a wireless service provider and an individual user perspective. Based on this discussion, two conceptual frameworks are suggested. The rest of this article is structured as follows. First, the key value drivers of m-portals from a wireless service provider’s viewpoint are portrayed. Second, a framework that depicts the unique attributes of mobile portals and their impact on the value users derive from these services is offered. This framework is then utilized for discussing some of the challenges mobile portal developers and service providers currently face. These obstacles need to be overcome in order for service providers and users to realize the true value of mobile portals.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».