MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390988433 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.11.021

Factors influencing customers’ attitude to adopt e-government mobile applications

2024· article· en· W4390988433 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saeed Mohamed Khatir Zahid Alhammadi, Muhammad Turki Alshurideh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHappinessGovernment (linguistics)Extant taxonSample (material)PsychologyMarketingField (mathematics)BusinessAssociation (psychology)Knowledge managementSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Establishing new relations with new customers and managing customers’ relations with the existing ones is important and considered challenges for each firm nowadays. Thus, studying and understanding different psychological factors like consumers’ emotions and happiness, motivates and attitudes are important while it helps in how to do more business with customers and push them to stay longer especially when adopting e-government mobile applications. This study used a quantitative research approach with survey data collection from different users of government mobile applications (GMA). The sample is around 340 from different backgrounds and levels of using different government services mobile apps. The results revealed the standardized regression and coefficients interpret the direct association between the study variables, hence confirmed the hypothesized model that included several factors such as perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived skills readiness, and perceived security toward attitudes to GMA and use of GMA effects on customer happiness and positive emotion. Moreover, the conclusion and implications confirmed the literature of this research field and elucidated most of the stated factors that significantly influence the customers’ emotion and happiness. For further study, research directions are given to expand the extant understanding of new different factors with other outcomes of mobile applications use.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207