Examining the adoption decision of Islamic electronic banks in Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to examine the factors affecting Jordanian Islamic banks’ customers’ adoption of electronic banks. The study relied on quantitative methods, where the study designed a questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) which derived from the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). The study sample consisted of 470 respondents. The study applied the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), where the results of the Chi-square test and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) test showed the validity of the model for analysis. The results showed that usefulness, privacy, and awareness affect the adoption of e-banking, and that ease to use and electronic skills affect the adoption of e-banking through usefulness. The results also show that Infrastructure does not affect the adoption of e-banking, and Convenience does not affect the adoption of e-banking through Intention to use e-banking. The study advises Islamic banks to spread awareness about the importance of electronic banking and design easy-to-use electronic services that enjoy privacy and security.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".