Does data privacy influence digital marketing? The mediating role of AI-driven trust: An empirical study of Zain Telecom company in Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to examine how data privacy concerns influence DOI in Digital Marketing and investigates how artificial intelligence trust mechanism integration modulates that effect. Primary data was collected by accessing the structured questionnaire targeting ZAIN Telecom employees as the chosen study site. The PLS-SEM technique was used in this research to analyze data privacy, digital marketing effectiveness, and AI-driven trust constructs. According to this study, digital marketing processes significantly focus on data privacy and, ultimately, AI-driven trust. Further, powerful AI trust systems will be required to reinforce data privacy and systematically configure and drive digital marketing enterprises. Thus, such systems could allow firms a sustainable competitive advantage in this new Battle for data security age. The findings discovered that data privacy concerns significantly impede AI-driven trust, diminishing digital marketing effectiveness. Therefore, they contribute to the literature by offering empirical support for AI-powered trust mediating between factors within a model and offering practical implications and extensions of the theoretical models. This literature helps industry practitioners and policymakers build trust in AI interventions to alleviate data privacy risks and improve support for digital marketing strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| 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".