MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311784514 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.8.007

Antecedents of user attitude towards e-commerce and future purchase intention

2022· article· en· W4311784514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nurchayati Nurchayati, Tri Widayati, Sulistiyani Sulistiyani, Sri Suprapti

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingUsabilityMediationPurchasingTechnology acceptance modelE-commercePsychologyComputer scienceMarketingBusinessWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study attempts to analyze the antecedents of e-commerce user behavior and their effect on future purchase intentions. Theoretical exploration shows that the antecedents used in the behavior of e-commerce users are perceived self-efficacy, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The study uses the behavior of e-commerce users as a mediating variable. The study was also conducted using a quantitative method, by distributing questionnaires to 250 e-commerce users in Indonesia. The analysis technique used is Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with SmartPLS software. The results show that perceived self-efficacy had a positive effect on perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. These three antecedents in turn have a positive and significant effect on future e-commerce shopping interest by using mediation of user behavior. The results are theoretically useful for deepening Technology Acceptance Model exploration by estimating future buying behavior and interest. Practically, this study encourages e-commerce platform website developers to increase the ease and usefulness to increase the positive behavior of users in purchasing products.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.002
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207