MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380537591 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.5.006

Factors affecting middle eastern countries' intention to use financial technology

2023· article· en· W4380537591 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Abdel Mohsen Al-Afeef, Baha Aldeen Mohammad Fraihat, Hamzeh Alhawamdeh, Haitham Ali Hijazi, Mohammad Ali Al-Afeef, Maher Nawasr, Ala’ Mohammad Rabi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk perceptionTechnology acceptance modelFinTechMiddle EastBusinessFinancial servicesUsabilityStructural equation modelingFinancial riskFinanceFinancial transactionMarketingPsychologyGeographyComputer sciencePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Financial technology, also known as Fintech, continues to transform the financial services sector globally. Fintech adoption has been delayed in some places, particularly in the Middle East, despite the potential positive benefits. This study investigates the mediating effect of perceived ease of use on the relationship between seamless transactions, financial risk, legal risk, security risk, perceived risk, and the intention to use financial technology in Middle Eastern countries. Data was collected from 500 respondents from five Middle Eastern countries (Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates) using a structured questionnaire, and partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to test the research model. The findings demonstrate that perceived ease of use strongly mediates the links between seamless transactions, financial risk, legal risk, security risk, perceived risk, and the intention to use financial technology. The study shed light on the significance of perceived ease of use in influencing people's intention to utilize financial technology as well as the function it serves in minimizing the effects of perceived risks. The findings of this study could be useful for financial technology companies operating in Middle Eastern countries, policymakers, and researchers interested in the adoption of financial technology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207