Customers Awareness and Satisfaction of Islamic Banking Products and Services: Evidence from the Kuwait Finance House
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to explore the levels of customer awareness and satisfaction with Islamic financial products and services offered by the Kuwait Finance House (KFH). The attempt is also made to identify reasons behind dealing with the KFH. To achieve these objective, 650 questionnaires were distributed during the period between 15 April and 15 May 2011 to the KFH customers and 429 returned completed. The results of the questionnaire analysis revealed that a significant proportion of the KFH customers are not aware of many of the products currently on offer. The respondents are relatively satisfied with almost all aspects of the KFH, although some work needs to be done to improve the appearance, architecture, internal design and furniture of the bank. They also expect an increase in the parking facilities and to train staff to handle transactions over the phone. The respondents indicated that they deal with the KFH for its name and image, its guaranteed confidentiality, its trusted management and Sharia’h Supervisory Committee. The respondents also demonstrated that they hold accounts in Islamic and commercial banks to diversify their investments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".