MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399855190 · doi:10.18280/isi.290323

Analyzing Customer Engagement with Gamification Approach in the Banking Sector Using the Rasch Model

2024· article· en· W4399855190 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Putri Taqwa Prasetyaningrum, Purwanto Purwanto, Adian Fatchur Rochim

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRasch modelBusinessCustomer engagementKnowledge managementEmployee engagementCustomer relationship managementRetail bankingProcess managementMarketingComputer sciencePsychologyManagementEconomicsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the instruments used to measure consumer engagement in mobile banking applications that employ gamification strategies.Customer engagement plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of e-marketing strategies, particularly for relationships, products, services, and brands.Gamification has emerged as a promising approach for promoting content marketing.Primary data from active users of mobile banking applications were collected from various banks and analyzed using the Rasch model to assess the instrument's efficiency.The study involved 451 participants and considered demographics, customer involvement, psychological aspects, game elements, and 26 dimensions.The results indicate that the average Outfit Mean Square (MNSQ) scores for individuals and items obtained from analyzing 49 questions with the Rasch model fall within the desirable range of 0.5-1.5.The mean values of INFIT and OUTFIT MNSQ, as well as INFIT and OUTFIT ZSTD, closely approximate the desired level.Additionally, the instrument demonstrates strong reliability with a coefficient alpha of 0.94.In conclusion, the findings suggest that the respondents understood the instruments employed in this study well and effectively facilitated data collection.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207