Governance in the Internet of Vehicles (IoV) Context: Examination of Information Privacy, Transport Anxiety, Intention, and Usage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the validity and acceptability of concern for information privacy with the Internet of vehicle context. For this purpose, the exploratory and confirmatory analysis processes were performed for testing the validity of concern for the Internet of vehicle information privacy. A total number of 357 responses were received online which were complete in all respects from college and university students studying information system course at undergraduate and graduate level. The estimated results obtained from exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis revealed that 3-dimension construct containing collection, error, and information accuracy measuring governance for Internet of vehicle information privacy (CFIOVIP) was validated through second order construction with strong goodness-of-fit estimates. The relevant factors were reliable and valid as per their internal and external validity estimates of Cronbach Alpha, average variance extracted, composite reliability, discriminant validity, and factor loading values including their fitness indices for 16 items for 3-dimension construct of CFIOVIP. The findings of the study indicate that Internet of vehicle users view secondary usage of information and unauthorised access of information as the same dimension with the title of information access for measuring CFIOVIP along with two other constructs like collection and error in information for the Internet of vehicle context. The study recommends a 2nd order CFIOVIP construct based on three dimensions, namely, collection, error, and information access, for testing the present governance of the Internet of vehicles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".