MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134053643 · doi:10.1080/10496491.2021.1888174

POD Mode of Payment, Return Policies and Virtual-Try-on Technology as Predictors of Trust: An Emerging Economy Case

2021· article· en· W3134053643 on OpenAlexaff
Urvashi Tandon, Myriam Ertz, Khanna Sakshi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Promotion Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingModerationHabitContext (archaeology)PaymentMode (computer interface)BusinessPsychologyMarketingEmerging marketsSample (material)Path analysis (statistics)Social psychologyAdvertisingComputer scienceStatisticsMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines virtual-try-on technology (VTO), return policy, and pay-on-delivery (POD) mode of payment as predictors of trust in an online context. The study further investigates trust as an influencer of repurchase intentions while positing habit as a moderator of the relationship between trust and repurchase intention. Data was collected through a self-administered and structured questionnaire targeting online shoppers in North Indian states. A sample of 424 online shoppers was considered in this research. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to evaluate the constructs. CFA was applied to calculate validity and composite reliability. To examine the hypothesized relationships, path analysis was carried out. The results confirmed that both return policies and POD are significant predictors of trust. Interestingly, VTO has no significant effect on trust, while habit strengthens the positive relationship between trust and repurchase intentions.

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)0.004
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations30
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Promotion ManagementSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207