MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046256448 · doi:10.1300/j366v01n03_07

Interactivity Design as the Key to Managing Customer Relations in E-Commerce

2002· article· en· W2046256448 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 Relationship Marketing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractivityConstruct (python library)Computer scienceKey (lock)Quality (philosophy)Knowledge managementMultimediaComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A number of studies have highlighted the importance of enhanced relationships with customers and users as a means of improving marketing performance. What seems to be missing is an understanding of how firms can improve online relationships. The current paper proposes that interactivity is a potentially important driver of enhanced online relationships. Although an increasing number of papers have dis cussed the notion of interactivity, there is no established construct to draw upon. A major contribution of the paper is scale development of the interactivity construct, both in terms of item generation and confirma tory factor testing. Because of the exploratory nature of the exercise, it is prudent to use student samples. The paper was able to develop a reliable and valid construct of interactivity. Moreover it was demonstrated that interactivity was a positive and significant determinant of online quality relationships in the two samples investigated.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.180
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.207 · 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