Application of Behavioral Theory in Predicting Consumers Adoption Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A society produces some values, ideas, intentions, and speculations about the human personality. These perceived psychological phenomena depend on rules, regulations, relationships, culture, tradition, etc. Depending on cultural factors, the behavioral intention to adopt online system operated through information and communication technology (ICT) can be affected vividly. Since adoption of ICT potentially depends on citizens’ beliefs and attitude toward technology, adoption behavior of users should be revealed considering citizens behavioral differences. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by Davis et al. (1989) is a strong information system theory that models how users come to accept and use a technology. However, the foundation of TAM including many other ICT adoption models has been developed from the deep insight of two popular and widely used behavioral theories named Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). To understand ICT adoption behavior, these two theories can provide generalized concept of human behavioral attitude and different beliefs which ultimately lead to behavioral intention to adopt ICT. This study has set its first objective to explore TRA and TPB as the theoretical foundation of behavioral attitude toward ICT-based online adoption. Then, based on that theoretical paradigm, our second objective focuses on developing a theoretical framework of revealing generalized ICT adoption and diffusion behavior.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".