Intentions to use fintech in the Jordanian banking industry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to explore the intentions to use FinTech and its important role in the banking industry in Jordan. Accordingly, this study analyzes the nature of the relationship between intention to use financial technology and each of: Processing Unit (PU) perceived usefulness, social impact (SI), customer’s trust (TRU) and perceived ease of use (PEU). Previous research related to financial technology is still under development and which is still being researched by providing an alternative approach to understanding how different business levels have stimulated the emergence of innovation-focused fintech companies, and what are the motives of success. Therefore, the main contribution of this research is to fill the gap in previous research related to financial technology that is still under development and which is still being researched by providing an alternative approach to understanding how different business levels have stimulated the emergence of innovation-focused fintech companies, and what are the motives of success. Results show a positive relation between intention to use financial technology and Processing Unit (PU), social impact (SI), customer’s trust (TRU) and perceived ease of use (PEU). The main contribution of this research is to fill the gap in previous research related to financial technology that is still under development and which is still being researched by providing an alternative approach to understanding how different business levels have stimulated the emergence of innovation-focused fintech companies, and what are the motives of success.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 it