Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions—Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Metaresearch, Bibliometrics
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Simulation or modelingConsensus signal: Simulation or modeling
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.308
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.998
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.044 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.015 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has received considerable research attention in the IS field over the past decade, placing an emphasis on the roles played by perceived ease-of-use and perceived usefulness in influencing technology adoption decisions. Meanwhile, alternative sets of antecedents to adoption have received less attention. In this paper, sets of antecedent constructs drawn from both TAM and the Perceived Characteristics of Innovating (PCI) inventory are tested and subsequently compared with one another. The comparison is done in the context of a large-scale market trial of a smart card-based electronic payment system being evaluated by a group of retailers and merchants. The PCI set of antecedents explains substantially more variance than does TAM, while also providing managers with more detailed information regarding the antecedents driving technology innovation adoption.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Topic
- Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Field
- Decision Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- Western University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Antecedent (behavioral psychology)Technology acceptance modelPayment cardContext (archaeology)Variance (accounting)MarketingSmart cardPaymentBusinessUsabilityScale (ratio)Set (abstract data type)Knowledge managementComputer sciencePsychologyAccountingComputer security
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes