MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336325997 · doi:10.5539/ass.v12n5p139

Customer Satisfaction with Electronic Banking Services in the Saudi Banking Sector

2016· article· en· W2336325997 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hani A. AlHaliq, Ahmad A. AlMuhirat

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronic bankingCustomer satisfactionBusinessMarketingQuality (philosophy)Financial servicesComputer scienceFinanceThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="a">This research aims to examine the extent of customer satisfaction with electronic banking (e-banking) services in the Saudi banking sector and to address issues with quality of services by focusing on the following: (i) ease of use; (ii) information security and reliability and its role in influencing customer adoption of electronic services; (iii) the mechanisms of monitoring and control over these services. The research employed analytic and descriptive methodology, collecting primary data through a survey. It examined various aspects of electronic services provided by banks in Saudi Arabia to shed more light on these services and customer expectations, while also taking into account modern studies in this field as secondary data. The results show that Saudi banks have succeeded in attaining significant customer satisfaction by improving their electronic services, facilitating electronic transactions, improving processing performance and enhancing the specifications of electronic services. In addition, they have achieved effective communication with their customers as well as the speed of applications. However, there is an absence of awareness and guidance for customers about the e-banking system. The results of this research lead to some recommendations for improving the electronic services provided by banks in Saudi Arabia to enhance customer satisfaction.</p>

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207