MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400653544 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2024.6.009

The impact of FINTECH on banking performance: Evidence from middle eastern countries

2024· article· en· W4400653544 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Ali Al-Afeef, Baliira Kalyebara, Nevin Youssef Kalbouneh, Nawaf Abuoliem, Amer N. Bani Yousef, Mohammad Abdel Mohsen Al-Afeef

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessFinancial system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the mediating role of competitiveness in the relationship between FinTech adoption and banking performance in the Middle Eastern region. A quantitative research design is employed, utilizing survey data from banking professionals across multiple countries. The data is analyzed using PLS-SEM modelling. The results show a positive and statistically significant impact of FinTech integration on the competitiveness of financial institutions and the performance of banks. On the other hand, the mediation of competitiveness is involved in the process of FinTech adoption and bank efficiency, suggesting that banking institutions that can utilize FinTech advantageously have greater chances of translating the benefits of FinTech adoption into better performance. This study supports the literature by providing a practical example of the use of FinTech as a factor for competitiveness and improving the performance of banks in the Middle East. These findings have huge managerial and practical implications and can help large banks gain competitive advantage and effectively integrate FinTech platforms to achieve real improvements. The value of this research is that it fills the gap in the existing literature, i.e. the role of competition as a mediating factor. By combining studies on competitive strategy approaches with those on technological innovation theory, this study combines a complete worldview related to the performance of banks in the digital age.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207