MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047663422 · doi:10.2753/jec1086-4415140404

Can the Media Richness of a Privacy Disclosure Enhance Outcome? A Multifaceted View of Trust in Rich Media Environments

2010· article· en· W2047663422 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

VenueInternational Journal of Electronic Commerce · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsDesjardinsRoyal Bank of CanadaHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrustworthinessSocial mediaOrder (exchange)BusinessOutcome (game theory)Internet privacyPsychologyAdvertisingComputer scienceMicroeconomicsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trust in rich media environments is conceptualized as comprising both trust in the retailer and trust in the others represented virtually during on-line interaction. More specifically, the authors posit that media richness (manipulated by the modality of the privacy disclosure) affects the e-store social presence that drives retailer trust and behavioral intentions, and that in rich media environments, agent trust (trustworthiness of the virtually represented agent communicating the disclosure) (1) mediates the relation between social presence and retailer trust, and (2) shapes consumer judgments of retailer trustworthiness and purchase intentions. These hypotheses are supported by the results of an experiment with 423 consumers, which show that there is a hierarchical order for social influence in rich media environments that entices retailers to manage not only the media richness of their B2C messages but also the social actors communicating these messages at their e-stores.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.306 · 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