MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236631742 · doi:10.1504/ijbis.2016.10000394

Exploring biometric technology adoption in a developing country context using the modified UTAUT

2016· article· en· W4236631742 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Information Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnified theory of acceptance and use of technologyBiometricsKnowledge managementPaceDeveloping countryTechnology acceptance modelBusinessUsabilityComputer scienceSocial influenceInternet privacyPsychologyComputer securitySocial psychologyHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biometric technology (BT) is a component of information security and person identification. Individual acceptance and adoption of BT is fundamental to successful implementation of BT by organisations. There has been a fairly moderate but improving pace of adoption of technology in developing countries. This study investigates factors affecting users' intention to use BT in a developing country based on the modified version of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Results show that simpler biometric methods (e.g., fingerprinting) have higher level of utilisation than more complex ones (e.g., DNA). The intention to adopt biometrics is influenced by perceived ease of use, security, resource facilitating conditions, self-efficacy, and compatibility. Technology facilitating condition and awareness were found to exert some level of impact, while perceived usefulness, awareness, peer influence and complexity did not show any statistical influence on the intention to adopt BT.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.194 · 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