MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996027892 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2019.08.76

Risk Reduction in Online Flight Reservation: The Role of Information Search

2019· article· en· W2996027892 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kwee-Fah Lee, Ahasanul Haque, Suharni Maulan, Kalthom Abdullah, Arun Kumar Tarofder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReservationReduction (mathematics)BusinessComputer scienceComputer networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The air industry is very competitive. Operating costs are high. To survive and earn profits, it is imperative for airlines to save substantial costs. This can come from selling tickets online. However, in many developing countries including Malaysia, a lot of consumers still refuse to buy flights online. Perceived risk of the internet is a key likely reason. To overcome this resistance, reducing perceived risk is crucial. This study examines the influence of perceived risk and risk-relievers on intention to reserve flight online. The two risk-relievers investigated are information type and personal sources of information. Using data collected online, PLS-SEM analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between type of information, personal sources of information, perceived risk, and intention to reserve flight online. Information type is found to relieve perceived risk and increases online reserve intention. Surprisingly, the results for personal sources of information show otherwise. In addition, perceived risk is empirically supported as being multidimensional. The findings suggest the importance of managing information to relieve risk perceptions so that airlines can stimulate higher online reservations. Thus, better profits can be made in spite of a competitive business environment.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207