MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1559233588 · doi:10.17705/1jais.00267

The Adoption of Online Shopping Assistants: Perceived Similarity as an Antecedent to Evaluative Beliefs

2011· article· en· W1559233588 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntecedent (behavioral psychology)Similarity (geometry)PsychologyArtifact (error)PerceptionContext (archaeology)Personality psychologySocial psychologyPersonalityAffect (linguistics)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent work, researchers have supplemented traditional IS adoption models with new constructs that capture users’ relational, social, and emotional beliefs. These beliefs have given rise to questions regarding their antecedents and the nature of the user-artifact relationship. This paper sheds light on these questions by asserting that users perceive and respond to information technology (IT) artifacts as social partners and form perceptions about their social characteristics. Subsequently, users’ perceptions of the similarity of these characteristics to their own affect evaluations of these artifacts. Within the context of online shopping and using an automated shopping assistant, our paper draws upon social psychology and human-computer interaction research in developing hypotheses regarding the effects of perceived personality similarity (PPS) and perceived decision process similarity (PDPS) on a number of beliefs (enjoyment, social presence, trust, ease of use, and usefulness). The results indicate that PDPS acts as an antecedent to these beliefs, while the effects of PPS are largely mediated by PDPS. Furthermore, the results reveal that the effects of perceived similarity, in general, exceed those of the effects of the individual assessments of the user’s and the assistant’s personalities and decision processes. These results have important implications for IS design. They highlight the importance of designing artifacts that can be matched to users’ characteristics. They also underscore the importance of considering similarity perceptions rather than solely focusing on perceptions of the IT artifact’s characteristics; a common approach in IS adoption research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it