MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133078033 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v4n6p95

The Moderating Effect of Subjective Norm on Cloud Computing Users’ Perceived Risk and Usage Intention

2012· article· en· W2133078033 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hsin‐Kuang Chi, Huery-Ren Yeh, Wei‐Chien Hung

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityRisk perceptionWorryCloud computingThe InternetNorm (philosophy)Computer sciencePsychologyInternet privacySocial psychologyWorld Wide WebAnxietyPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high popularity and high demand of internet applications lead to faster development of cloud computing services that make network access become more convenient. However, using a new technology can cause users’ perceived risk because they worry about internet security and invasion of privacy. The study aims to explore the influence of end users’ perceived risk on usage intention of cloud computing services and the interactive effect of perceived risk and subjective norm on usage intention. The study dispatched 350 questionnaires to internet users. The amount of valid questionnaires is 238 and the effective response rate is 68%. The results showed that both perceived risk and subjective norm are significantly affected to usage intention, and subjective norm has a moderating effect on the relationship between perceived risk and usage intention.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations48
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207