MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800160432 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v10n2p60

Exploring Factors Affecting Consumers’ Adoption of Shopping via Mobile Applications in Turkey

2018· article· en· W2800160432 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oğuz Yıldız, Hakan Kitapçı

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingScope (computer science)Conceptual modelMobile commerceDelphi methodPersonalizationMarketingBusinessOrder (exchange)Exploratory factor analysisComputer scienceKnowledge managementExploratory researchField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to identify the factors behind consumers’ adoption of shopping via mobile applications and to develop a new model that explains this situation. The related literature was examined for this purpose. Delphi technique was preferred to determine factors in the study. Data was collected through questionnaires. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted with SPSS. A research model based on an integration of various theoretical fields was developed. As a result of EFA, ten new dimensions emerged in the study. And then, in order to statistically analyze the measurement and structural models, this study used Smart PLS for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) technique. After path analysis with Smart PLS, a new conceptual model was developed to explain adoption of shopping via mobile applications by consumers in Turkey. Structures such as Personalization, Word of Mouth Communication and Perceived Mobility used in the model developed within the scope of this research, but rarely used in this field of studies, were verified to be determinants of shopping behavior via mobile applications in Turkey. The model developed within the study is both valid and reliable in terms of its structure and all relations established within the scope of the model are significant.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207