MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411656791 · doi:10.51847/wehbwrkhfh

10.51847/wEHbWRKHfh

2000· article· en· W4411656791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Management and Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyQuality (philosophy)MediatorPsychologyMarketingBusinessAdvertisingMedicineInternal medicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between the knowledge of IT managers and the use of its types with the attraction and loyalty of the customers of Tehran's gym clubs.The research has descriptive-correlation method and field method.The statistical population of this research is Tehran's gym clubs' managers whose number is about 2000 people.The sample size was 400 people according to Morgan table.384 questionnaires were used for data analysis.The method used to select samples was non-random and available method.The tools usedwereMohammadis21 questions questionnaire ( 2013), standardized questionnaire 6 absorption and standardized questionaires,6questions of effective recruiting, and8 questions of customer loyalty questionnaire.The content validity of the questionnaires was also approved by a group of university sport management professors.Reliability of the questionnaire was 0.88, 0.85, 0.80, and 0.79, respectively, through Cronbach's alpha.In order to analyze the data, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, binomial test and Spearman correlation coefficient were used and for cause and effect relationships, structural equations variables were used.The most important findings of the research showed that there is a significant relationship between the IT knowledge with the absorpation and variables and the effectiveness of customer attraction and loyalty(p<0.05),also according to (R2=0.09,GOF=0.941) and combined AVE and extruded structures were fitted to the approved model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9620.982

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicEducational Management and QualityFrench-language works237,207