Research on the Influence of Web Experience on Consumers’ Purchasing Intention
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conversion rate is the core of e-commerce sites, and web experience is one of the most important factors of web conversion. A good web experience can bring consumers with trust and confidence, so that improve the income and profitability of the e-commerce business. This paper reviews the theory of web experience, the consumers’ purchasing intention and other related theories. In this study, we systematically analyze the definition, measurement, evaluation system and application status of web experience, and discusses the relationship between web experience and consumers’ purchasing intention. Research shows that the web experience is the weight of web design to the decision-making factors, the existing research on the web experience’s definition, composition there are different, resulting in web experience measurement and evaluation different; web experience measurement methods and quantitative evaluation methods have yet to be improved. According to previous research, we summarize the shortcomings of current web evaluation and provide a direction for future research on web experience and consumers’ purchasing intention.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it