MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175855517 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2021.4.002

Exploring the relationship between trust, ease of use after purchase and switching re-purchase intention

2021· article· en· W3175855517 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dede Suleman, Sabil Sabil, Sri Rusiyati, Imelda Sari, Susan Rachmawati, Ety Nurhayaty, Rd Bily Parancika

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityBusinessAdvertisingMarketingDescriptive statisticsData collectionTest (biology)PsychologyComputer scienceSociologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research conducted by this researcher intends to analyze the effect of trust and ease of use on purchase decisions and repurchase intention. The data collection method in this study uses a questionnaire with 130 consumers who have purchased at an online store. The analytical method used is descriptive analysis, and the test instrument uses SEM AMOS. in this study using four variables, thirteen dimensions and twenty-six indicators. The results show that trust and ease of use have a significant effect on buying decisions and also have a significant effect on repurchase intention, and purchase decisions have a significant and significant effect on repurchase intention. so it can be said that trust and ease of use are the entry points that make consumers start to move to the next stage, therefore online store marketers need to pay attention.

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)0.009
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.334
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicConsumer Behavior and Marketing InfluenceFrench-language works237,207