An integrated model for the usage and acceptance of stickers in WhatsApp through SEM-ANN approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This analysis integrates the “technology acceptance model (TAM)” with the “use of gratifications theory (U&G)” to develop an embedded model that predicts the use and satisfaction of emotional icons called stickers through WhatsApp. The explanation for combining these two theories is that U&G offers accurate information and a thorough knowledge of use, while TAM theory has been firmly established in several technical implementations. A newly developed hybrid analysis procedure has been applied within this research. Using an artificial neural network (ANN), and the structural equation model (SEM) have been combined. The research also uses the importance-performance map analysis (IPMA) to present each factor’s performance as well as importance. The ANN and IPMA research have both indicated that for sticker use intention, a highly essential predictor is Socialization. An online questionnaire survey was developed to assess the recommended model. The intention to use stickers was significantly affected by “Socialization, Self Presentation, Enjoyment, Novelty, Unique Function, Perceived Ease of Use, and Perceived Usefulness”. The research's main achievement is the convergence of two separate theories into a single conceptualization to accurately calculate the TAM components when it comes to the usage of stickers in WhatsApp. Theoretically, the recommended model provides enough insight for aspects which affect the intention to use stickers with relevance to the socialization’s factors considering interpersonal aspects. Practically, the higher education decision-makers along with professionals would extract variables that are important as compared to others and policies would be developed accordingly. The deep ANN model competence has been analyzed within the research to decide upon the non-linear associations between variables of the theoretical model, methodologically.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".