MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012120917 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n2p51

Exploring the Role of Trust in Mobile-Banking Use by Indonesian Customer Using Unified Theory of Acceptance and Usage Technology

2020· article· en· W3012120917 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamad Saparudin, Agus Rahayu, Ratih Hurriyati, Mokh Adib Sultan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpectancy theoryUnified theory of acceptance and use of technologyMobile bankingSocial influenceBusinessMarketingIndonesianEmpirical researchPsychologySocial psychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

M-banking is an innovative digital application that provides convenience in transactions and this technology benefits both customers and banks. The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that influence the customer's intention to use m-banking and the role of trust in influencing the UTAUT construct. The UTAUT model that is expanded with trust variables is used in this study. Data was collected through an empirical study based survey of 243 participants in Jakarta, using convenience sampling. The study results show that there is a significant relationship between performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and trust with behavioral intention. Moreover, trust significantly influence performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence. The findings theoretically are able to prove the factors that influence the customer's mobile banking adoption, where the effort expectancy factor is the factor that most influences the intention to use m-banking in Indonesia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.314
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.130 · 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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207