Relationship between intangibility and perceived risk: moderating effect of privacy, system security and general security concerns
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to explore the association between intangibility and perceived risk using a sample of North American households. This relationship is explored within two purchase environments, namely online and offline. The authors also investigated the moderating effects of privacy, system security and general security concerns when purchasing in an online environment. Design/methodology/approach The survey was delivered to 156 households in a small town in the Midwest and collected upon completion. Findings The perception of risk is increased when two negatively loaded pieces of information are processed simultaneously (i.e. product intangibility and privacy concern). Furthermore, system security was identified as the most relevant concern in e‐commerce. Research limitations/implications The representativeness of the sample is limited. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed. Originality/value The results provide interesting insights about the generalizability of previous findings based on student samples, and show the importance of privacy concerns, system security concerns, general security concerns for those purchasing in online environments.
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 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 | 0.023 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it