MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594315574 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v10n4p42

Implementation of E-Training in Developing Country: Empirical Evidence from Jordan

2017· article· en· W2594315574 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fawzieh Mohammed Saeed Masa'd

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeveloping countryContext (archaeology)Technology acceptance modelKnowledge managementTraining (meteorology)The InternetExternal variableEmpirical researchEmpirical evidenceBusinessComputer scienceMarketingUsabilityEconomic growthEconomicsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is to emphasize the factors that aid e-training adoption in the developing country like Jordan. This paper is based on past review literature databases. The literature recognized the role of computer self-efficacy, availability of resources and perceived support in e-training adoption. This paper using the technology acceptance model (TAM) for modelling framework and explained the importance of these variables in e-training adoption in developing country context. The author found that the combined role of computer self-efficacy, technological infrastructure, Internet facilities and technical support is critical for e-training adoption in developing countries, particularly in Jordan.Thus, the authors proposed the combination of these variables which would encourage future research on the use of TAM in technology adoption. Research limitations/implications – This paper gives an elaboration of the role of computer self-efficacy, perceived cost, availability of resources and perceived support with TAM as base of the framework. This provides researchers the opportunity to test the proposed framework empirically and further suggest other variables that can aid e-training adoption in the context of developing country.Practical implications – The result of this paper can serve as a guide to managers and policymakers to have a better understanding of the requirements for e-training adoption, especially in developing countries. This will go a long way towards designing good policies that could maximise e-training results.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.629
GPT teacher head0.614
Teacher spread0.016 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207