English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Unfortunately, social science surveys are often confronted with biases. Due to network effects, on network markets, e.g. on markets of Social Network Services (as Facebook), only one company, the “standard,” dominates a local (or even the global) market. Common models of evaluation and acceptance of information systems (as variants of the Technology Acceptance Model, TAM) capture systems’ quality on dimensions of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, trust, and fun. In an empirical investigation on different user groups, we found that the users were not able to present unbiased quality estimations of “their” standard system and other, non-standard systems. They were captured in their standard, leading to the conception of the “standard-dependent user blindness” (SDUB). So users’ quality statements on information systems on network markets are a highly vulnerable area of surveys.

Between the Profiles: Another such Bias. Technology Acceptance Studies on Social Network Services