MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301844255

An Examination of IndividualâÂÂs Perceived Security andPrivacy of the Internet in Malaysia and the Influence ofThis on Their Intention to Use E-Commerce: Using AnExtension of the Technology Acceptance Model

2007· article· en· W2301844255 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muniruddeen Lallmahamood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetTechnology acceptance modelVariance (accounting)Internet privacyBusinessUsabilityPerceptionInternet securityMarketingComputer scienceInformation securityComputer securityPsychologyWorld Wide WebAccountingSecurity service
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the impact of perceived security and privacy on the intention to use Internet banking. An extended version of the technology acceptance model (TAM) is used to examine the above perception. A survey was distributed, the 187 responses mainly from the urban cities in Malaysia, have generally agreed that security and privacy are still the main concerns while using Internet banking. The research model explains over half of the variance of the intention to use Internet banking [R2 = 0.532 (adjusted)], the unexplained 47 percent of variance suggests that the model may have excluded other possible factors influencing the acceptance of Internet banking. Interaction in the local language (Bahasa Malaysia) did not have an impact on the ease of use of Internet banking. Internet security, Internet banking regulations and customers’ privacy would remain future challenges of Internet banking acceptance. The value of this study may provide an updated literature in the field of Internet banking acceptance in Malaysia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations171
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Internet Banking and CommerceSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207