Cited by 21Customer Service Quality and LoyaltyTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourAI in Service Interactions

The process of solving problems with self-service technologies: a study from the user’s perspective

Open access
Nili, Alireza, Tate, Mary, Johnstone, David·2019·Electronic Commerce Research

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10660-018-9304-0

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 101 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. In L.H. Eckensberger, & E.D. Lantermann (Eds.), Emotion und Reflexivität (pp. 157-181). München, Germany: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
  2. Eskin, M. (2013). Problem-solving therapy in the clinical practice. Newnes. Chapter 4, pages 29-47.
  3. Eskin, M. (2013). Problem-solving therapy in the clinical practice. Newnes. Chapter 3, pages 17-27.
  4. Girman, M., Keusch, P., & Kmec, P. (2009). Faults, failures and availability-in self- service technology. Management Services, 53(4), 44-47.
  5. Gleason, MEJ., Bolger, N., & Shrout, P. (2001). The effects of research design on reports of mood: comparing daily diary, panel, and crosssectional designs. In Poster given at Society for Personality and Social Psychology Conference, San Antonio, Texas.
  6. Nezu, A. M., Nezu, C. M., & D'Zurilla, T. J. (2007). Solving life's problems. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
  7. Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive Thinking (Enlarged Ed.). New York, USA: Harper & Row.
  8. Whimbey, A., & Lockhead, J. (1991). Problem-solving and comprehension (5th Ed.). New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Asociates.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nili, A., Tate, M., & Johnstone, D.
Affiliations
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
  • Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
Corresponding author
Nili, Alireza
Venue
Electronic Commerce Research
Published
2018-04-17
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
373-407
ISSN
  • 1389-5753 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-9362
OpenAlex
W2801260502
Cited by
21
References
101
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
4.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Electronic Commerce Research (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
self-service technology, problem resolution, user expectations, user complaints, problem-solving theory, process theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review