MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026917702 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2020.5.024

Factors affecting acceptance and use of online technology in Thai people during COVID-19 quarantine time

2020· article· en· W3026917702 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ampol Chayomchai, Wilaiwan Phonsiri, Arnon Junjit, Rujirek Boongapim, Ubonwan Suwannapusit

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarantineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakBusinessInternet privacyComputer scienceVirologyMedicineOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate factors affecting behavioral intention and use behavior of technologies of Thai people under the COVID-19 circumstances.390 respondents were participated in our survey as sample size for statistical analysis.The authors utilized PLS-SEM assessment for testing the research hypotheses.Descriptive analysis revealed that Thai people in the quarantine period or work from home had suffered from a moderate to high levels of anxiety or stress.This has made Thai people increasingly use online and mobile technology or programs compared to the past.The study revealed four key factors that had significant and positive effects on the intention of users in using online technology including performance expectancy, effort expectancy, trust, and perceived risk.In addition, it indicated that behavioral intention positively affected the actual use behavior of technologies during quarantine time.The authors expect that policymakers or strategists could be used to manage the use of online and mobile technology for people, especially during the tough time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations48
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207