Exploring the dual routes in influencing sales and adoption in augmented reality retailing: a mixed approach of SEM and FsQCA
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study investigates augmented reality (AR) retailing and attempts to develop a profound understanding of consumer decision-making processes in AR-enabled e-retailing. Design/methodology/approach The study is grounded in rich informational cues and information processing mechanisms by incorporating the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) and trust transfer theory. This study employs a mixed analytic method that incorporates structural equation modeling (SEM) and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to provide a complete picture of individual information process mechanisms in AR retailing under the tenet of ELM. Findings The SEM analysis results confirm the relationships between the central and peripheral route factors, information processing outcomes and eventual behavioral intentions. Moreover, all configurations revealed by the fsQCA include both central and peripheral factors. Hence, the dual routes proposed in the ELM are verified by using two distinct analytical approaches. Originality/value This study is pioneering in validating and contextualizing ELM theory in AR retailing. In addition, this study offers a methodological paradigm by demonstrating the application of multi-analysis in exploring consumers’ information process mechanisms in AR retailing, which offers a holistic and comprehensive view to understand consumers’ decision-making mechanisms.
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.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it