MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295122052 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v5n1p1

SMEs and Electronic Commerce: The Case of Istanbul

2016· article· en· W2295122052 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samet Kaşik, Erkut Altındağ, Volkan Öngel

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessE-commerceReliability (semiconductor)Relation (database)MarketingThe InternetField (mathematics)Field surveyPerceptionKnowledge managementIndustrial organizationComputer sciencePsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electronic commerce has been increasingly popular and has become a must tool for the enterprises. Since the Internet had started to be used commonly by all segments of the society, electronic commerce gained a crucial significance as a practical way for people to meet their needs. The main purpose of this study is to examine the perception of and the expectations from electronic commerce by Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and to evaluate the effect of the obstacles to e-commerce in the innovation processes and performance. Within this study, the impact of the innovation processes and innovation data sources in the field of electronic commerce on the performance of the enterprises is analyzed. A survey comprising of 50 questions was conducted by the participation of middle and higher level managers of the SMEs in Istanbul. In total, 277 surveys were examined. Reliability and validity of these surveys were checked via SPSS-17 and evaluated by using the methods of factor analysis, correlation analysis, and regression analysis. As a result, it has been confirmed that factors of innovation processes and innovation data sources have a meaningful relation to the performance of companies. Therefore, the importance and necessity of investing in innovation processes and data sources for increasing the company performance are verified by this study.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness and Management ResearchSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207