MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951973076 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v10n5p474

The Influence of Information Acceptance on Information Use Performance in the Case of Vulnerable Classes

2019· article· en· W2951973076 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Soonduck Yoo, Jongsun Park

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCompetence (human resources)Social psychologyPositive attitudePositive correlationAge groupsApplied psychologyDemographyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzed the effect of information acceptance on the information use performance for the vulnerable groups. The sample group was classified into general public group and vulnerable groups residing in Korea, and the vulnerable groups were divided into the disabled, the low - income group, the elderly group and the farmers. The characteristics of the vulnerable groups were selected by the competence level, use motive, and use attitudes and the correlation between each factor and use utilization was analyzed. In all groups, the use motive and the use attitude showed a strong positive correlation with the use performance of .682. In particular, the information use attitude and the information use performance were closely related. The correlation between the use attitude and use performance of the vulnerable groups were investigated in the order of lower grade (.695), farmers & fishermen (.688), elderly (.674), and disabled (.672). In conclusion, this study shows that if use attitude is high, use performance is high. Therefore, in order to expand the acceptance of information on vulnerable groups, various programs that can increase the use attitude of information should be introduced. Through this, it was found that the vulnera-ble groups could induce the use attitude of information and the satisfaction of the use performance, and ultimately the digital information divide could be reduced by improving the information acceptance of the vulnerable groups. This study has limitations in securing various contents of inquiry based on questionnaire survey. It is necessary to analyze various factors besides factors selected as environmental fac-tors of information acceptance as characteristics of vulnerable groups.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.008
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207