MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074455419 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2010.158

Does Live Help Service Matter? An Empirical Test of the DeLone and McLean's Extended Model in the E-Service Context

2010· article· en· W2074455419 on OpenAlexaff
Jingjun Xu, Izak Benbasat, Ronald T. Cenfetelli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService qualityContext (archaeology)Service (business)Test (biology)Quality (philosophy)Customer satisfactionEmpirical researchMarketingInformation systemInformation qualityPerceptionBusinessKnowledge managementPsychologyComputer scienceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing prevalence of online shopping, many companies have begun to provide "live help" functions on their Web sites to facilitate interactions between online consumers and customer service representatives. However, little is understood as to the effect of live help service contributing to online consumers' perceptions. We investigate the effect of live help service on system quality, information quality, and service quality. Based on the Herzberg's hygiene-motivator theory, we empirically test the DeLone and McLean extended IS success model within the e-service context. Results suggest that 1) live help service has a positive effect on consumers' perceived system, information, and service quality, 2) service quality has a positive effect on both satisfaction and intention, 3) information quality has a positive effect on satisfaction, but not intention, and 4) system quality does not have a significant effect on either satisfaction or intention. Implications for researchers and practitioners are discussed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207