MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2103996802 · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n17p94

Regret and Satisfaction Influencing Attitude and Intention in Using Homestay Terminology: The Structural Approach

2013· article· en· W2103996802 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Siti Falindah Padlee, Azwadi Ali, Noor Fadhiha Mokhtar, Siti Nur ‘Atikah Zulkiffli

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegretTerminologyStructural equation modelingFeelingSample (material)PsychologyBusinessMarketingPrivate sectorSocial psychologyEconomicsMathematicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Misusing of homestay terminology by private lodging entrepreneurs poses a threat to homestay industry in Malaysia. This unethical behavior by private lodging entrepreneurs has caused misunderstanding on the use of homestay terminology among tourists and also public in general. Using a 132 sample of private lodging entrepreneurs in Terengganu and with SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) analysis method, this study examined the relationship among the constructs of regret, satisfaction, attitude and intention of private lodging entrepreneurs on the use of homestay terminology in Terengganu, Malaysia. The SEM results showed that all three hypotheses were supported. The results show that private lodging entrepreneurs were very much unregretful with their action and there was a feeling of satisfaction on the use of homestay terminology. This paper concludes a discussion on the findings and recommendations to curb this unethical 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social Science→Same topicDigital Marketing and Social Media→French-language works237,207→