MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292959242 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.5.012

The adoption of TikTok application using TAM model

2022· article· en· W4292959242 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Hamdi Al Khasawneh, Abdel‐Aziz Ahmad Sharabati, Shafig Al-Haddad, Reem Tbakhi, Hesham Abusaimeh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryUsabilityTechnology acceptance modelPsychologyVariance (accounting)Computer-assisted web interviewingSocial mediaTest (biology)Social psychologyApplied psychologyComputer scienceMarketingWorld Wide WebBusinessHuman–computer interactionDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most used social media platforms is TikTok, which is widely and increasingly used due to the short-video interactive music. Very few studies about why people prefer to use TikTok applications were carried out. Therefore, the objective of the current research is to examine the effect of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived enjoyment, sense of belonging, and user-generated content on the adoption of TikTok application, using the TAM model. Quantitative research has been applied as a methodological approach and was successfully carried out through an online survey, gathering a total of 255 filled surveys to test the applicability of the developed research model. The results show that the user-generated content has the highest significant positive influence on the intention to use TikTok. Followed by the perceived enjoyment, then the sense of belonging, the perceived ease of use, and the perceived usefulness, consequently. Also, results show that the independent variables explain 47.8% of the variance in the intention to use TikTok. Finally, to assure the generalizability of the study results the study recommends conducting further research in different countries and communities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.136
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207