MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081721410 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2020.8.024

The effect of decision to purchase on shop fashion product in Indonesia mediated by attitude to shop

2020· article· en· W3081721410 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dede Suleman, Ida Zuniarti, Ratnawaty Marginingsih, Isnurrini Hidayat Susilowati, Imelda Sari, Sabil Sabil, Ety Nurhayaty

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicImpulse Buying and Technology Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduct (mathematics)BusinessAdvertisingMarketingComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the relationship between consumer attitudes and decisions. By examining the attitude forming variables, among others, usefulness, ease of use and risk which directly influence attitudes and the direct influence of consumer attitudes on consumer decisions. The population in this study is a large number of consumers and the amount is not known with certainty, the researchers, for the sample using a random sampling method which is part of the non-probability sampling technique with the criteria of respondents who have shopped in offline retail and online retail, over 17 years old and domiciled in Jakarta. Samples taken amounted to 160 with 32 questions for each respondent. The results show that usefulness and ease of use affect consumer attitudes. While ease of use is the most powerful variable and has the biggest contribution that influences attitude. In this research hypothesis there is one hypothesis that is rejected, namely the effect of risk on attitude attitudes, the results of the study found that risk has no effect on attitude.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicImpulse Buying and Technology ImpactsFrench-language works237,207