The impact of knowledge sharing quality on e-supply chain management: The mediating role of e-trust
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study has tried to investigate the impact of knowledge sharing quality on E-supply chain management, with the mediating effect of E-trust. To attain the research purposes, a quantitative approach of research was applied. The needed data was collected from a sample consisting of 281 managers of Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) companies in Jordan. A questionnaire was utilized to collect the data. Appropriate statistical analyses were conducted such as scale reliability and validity by using IBM SPSS 21 software. Structural model and hypothesis testing using AMOS software were then utilized. The results have shown that knowledge sharing quality with its main dimensions (usefulness, timeliness, accuracy, and relevance) has positive significant impacts on E-supply chain management. Besides that, E-trust has revealed a significant mediating impact between the studied independent and dependent factors. Other complementary future studies related to the practices of E-supply chain management practices, quality of knowledge sharing, and E-trust in other Jordanian organizations were also proposed.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".