Pembelian impulsif pada e-commerce shopee (studi pada konsumen shopee di Jakarta Selatan)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Competition in the e-commerce world is rising so competitively. Every time e-commerce offers their products or services to their consumers attractively. This condition causes the consumers to vae more alternatives to shop, especially at Shopee Indonesia. The purposeof this study was to find out and analyze the effect of sales promotion, product quality,and electronic word of mouth on impulsive buying. This study used e-commerce Shopeeas the object. This is a quantitative study using primary data. The sample was taken using a purposive sampling technique with 75 respondents selected based on criteriathat had been determined. The data were analysed using SmartPLS. The result showedthat sales promotion have no significant effect on impulsive buying with the value of significance of 1,994. Another finding showed that product quality and electronic word of mouth have significant effect on impulsive buying with the value of significant is 2,475 and 3,679. Therefore, e-commerce Shopee must take advantage of product quality andelectronic word of mouth in order they have a competitive advantage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".