How Viable Is the UTAUT Model in a Non-Western Context?
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
The present research examines the plausibility of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model in predicting internet banking behaviour as a newly adopted technology in third world countries. Data is collected from three Arab countries: Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Confirmatory factor analysis is used to test the hypothesized structural model. Findings are congruent with model testing under conditions of volitional usage behaviour. In this regard, the role of facilitating conditions variable is insignificant as a determinant of usage behaviour. Social norms variable also proved to be weak determinant of behavioural intentions. Findings demonstrate effort expectancy as the key determinant of internet banking usage behaviour in the examined markets, while users’ experience moderates the impact of effort expectancy on behavioural intention. Results should enhance our understanding of internet banking usage in developing countries and support e-services promoting in this region.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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