## 4 Discussion  
The development of this work was based on two essential characteristics: the first was the review of similar works, and the second characteristic was the collection of information that allowed us to determine the factors that influenced consumers to use eCommerce. The review of previous works was of great value, since eCommerce is a concept that has been developed for many years [41]. This means that there is a lot of information on the subject; however, with the pandemic, eCommerce has become a necessity for all companies. Therefore, the migration of the traditional market to the use of a digital channel is a necessity that must be analyzed under the new conditions given by the new normality [42].  
The proposed method is not limited to determining the variables that affect the use of eCommerce. This work, being scalable, can identify the incidence values of each item in a survey that evaluates a factor [43]. With this feature, it is possible to design surveys that guarantee the quality of the data and capture the real impression of the consumer with respect to the digital market [44]. The application of the method and the results obtained made it possible to generate a comparison with related works. The main difference with respect to our proposal was the integral process that was carried out, since this work included the design of the survey and performed a validation analysis of this instrument; in addition, the incidence value of each question and how these could respond to the phenomenon under study were analyzed. Instead, several of the studies reviewed used online tools that directly presented the results [45], without necessarily validating the factors that influenced people's perceptions of eCommerce [46].  
The results identified that the accessibility category did not have a greater influence on the decision of consumers before eCommerce. The matrix of commonalities in Table 11 shows that the initial and extraction values did not reach 0.400, this being the base value of incidence with which the analysis was performed. Its incidence value was so low that it ranked between 0.035 and 0.012 for question one on accessibility, and the second question reached between 0.48 and 0.044; these results were sufficient for the elimination of the category. However, there is the possibility of increasing the number of questions or creating a survey that only evaluates the accessibility of eCommerce platforms [47]. For any additional solution, it is important to establish the objective pursued and the information that is required to be known; in the designed survey, the selected questions were:  
* Is it easy to find what I need on the website?
* Does the website allow me to complete a transaction quickly?  
These questions allowed us to know exactly how people felt about the web pages that the platforms managed and how they allowed a transaction to be executed. When processing the information, these questions did not cause a greater impact on the users, who, in turn, gave greater importance to issues such as catalogs, existing support, or delivery compliance. Undoubtedly, accessibility for application developers is very important, and the system improvements and updates that they perform mean that accessibility for users is overlooked or the importance of the concept is not understood. Therefore, for the end user, this category is something that must be included innately in eCommerce platforms or applications.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline  & **Stratified Cross-Validation** & \\ \hline Correctly classified instances & 161 & 74.1935\% \\ Incorrectly classified instances & 56 & 25.8065\% \\ Kappa statistic & 0.6777 & \\ Mean absolute error & 0.1181 & \\ Root mean square error & 0.308 & \\ Total number of instances & 217 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 20: Stratified cross-validation with re-evaluation on test set.