MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409492500 · doi:10.1080/23311975.2025.2490597

Self-service technology in airports: analyzing flow experience and user acceptance in Indonesia

2025· article· en· W4409492500 on OpenAlexaff
Juliater Simarmata, Muhammad Iqbal Firdaus, Reni Dian Octaviani, Sven Buyle

Bibliographic record

VenueCogent Business & Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsTransport Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessTechnology acceptance modelService (business)Process managementComputer scienceMarketingUsabilityHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aviation industry has undergone significant transformation due to the adoption of self-service technology (SST), which aims to enhance operational efficiency and passenger experience. This study aims to understand the key factors contributing to the successful adoption and usage of self-service check-in kiosks. We examine how flow experience and user acceptance are influenced by perceived performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions within the context of Soekarno-Hatta Airport. The study employs an electronic questionnaire and partial least square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) to analyze the data. The results indicate that social influence and facilitating conditions significantly enhance flow experience, which positively influences passengers’ intention to continue to use SST. These findings contribute to the theoretical expansion of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model by integrating the concept of flow experience and providing practical insights for enhancing passenger engagement and satisfaction through SST in airports.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCogent Business & ManagementSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207