Factors Influencing Behavioral Intention and Use Behavior of Junior Students to Use Ubiquitous Learning in Chengdu, China
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14456/shserj.2024.64Keywords:
Ubiquitous Learning, Perceived Usefulness, Social Influence, Behavioral Intention, Use BehaviorAbstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the factors that influence the behavioral intention and behavior of third year college students when using ubiquitous Learning in Chengdu, Sichuan Province. The key variables are understanding u-learning, assimilating u-learning, applying u-learning, perceived usefulness, e-learning motivation, social influence, behavioral intention, and use behavior. Research design, data, and methodology: The researcher employed quantitative techniques and questionnaires to gather data from the designated population. Our sampling approach encompassed purposive, quota, and convenience sampling methods. Prior to questionnaire distribution, we assessed content validity and reliability through pilot tests, utilizing the Item-Objective Congruence Index and Cronbach's Alpha. To scrutinize the data, assess model fit, and validate the causal relationships among variables for hypothesis testing, we conducted Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. Results: The findings indicate that the conceptual model can explain the behavioral intention and usage behavior. understanding u-learning and applying u-learning significantly influence perceived usefulness. Perceived usefulness, e-learning motivation, social influence significantly influences behavioral intention towards use behavior. Nevertheless, assimilating u-learning has no significant influence on perceived usefulness. Conclusions: The adoption of ubiquitous learning among third-year college students holds the promise of enhancing their educational experience and preparing them for the challenges of the digital age.
References
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior (1st ed.). Dorsey Press.
Alkhadim, M., & Gidado, K., & Painting, N. (2018). Perceived Crowd Safety in Large Space Buildings: The Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Perceived Risk Variables. Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 8(1), 22-39.
Bagozzi, R., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 16, 74-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Baker, L. A., Jacobson, K. C., Raine, A., Lozano, D. I., & Bezdjian, S. (2007). Genetic and environmental bases of childhood antisocial behavior: A multi-informant twin study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116(2), 219-235.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.116.2.219
Burns, A. C., & Bush, R. F. (2019). Marketing Research (9th ed.). Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with Amos: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (2nd ed.). New York: Taylor and Francis Group.
Castells, M. (2009). Communication power (1st ed.) Oxford University Press.
Chauhan, S., & Jaiswal, M. (2016). Determinants of acceptance of ERP software training in business schools: Empirical investigation using UTAUT model. The International Journal of Management Education, 14(3), 248-262.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2016.05.005
Cheng, V. M. Y. (2016). Understanding and Enhancing Personal Transfer of Creative Learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.001
Chu, H., Hwang, G., & Tseng, J. C. (2010). An innovative approach for developing and employing electronic libraries to support context‐aware ubiquitous learning. The Electronic Library, 28(6), 873-890. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471011093552
Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393553
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Demircioglu, T., & Ucar, S. (2015). Investigating the effect of argument-driven inquiry in laboratory instruction. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15, 267-283. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.1.2324
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.) Pearson Education.
Gupta, K., & Arora, N. (2020). Investigating consumer intention to adopt mobile payment systems: An Indian perspective. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 17(2/3), 115.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ijttc.2020.109388
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
Harrington, S., & Guimaraes, T. (2005). Corporate culture, absorptive capacity, and IT success. Information and Organization, 15(1), 39-63.
Hill, R. J., Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Contemporary Sociology, 6(2), 244-245. https://doi.org/10.2307/2065853
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1986). Using our learning styles (1st ed.). Berkshire: Peter Honey.
Hoyle, R. H. (2012). Handbook of structural equation modeling (1st ed.). The Guilford Press.
Huang, X. D., Lu, D. M., Ricciuto, P. J., Hanson, A. D., Richardson, X., Lu, E., Weng, S., Nie, L., Jiang, E., Hou, I. F., & Luo, Y. (2021). A model-independent data assimilation (MIDA) module and its applications in ecology. Geosci Model Dev., 14(8), 5217-5238.
Joreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202.
Katz, Y. J. (2002). Attitudes affecting college students' preferences for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 2-9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00202.x
Kim, L. (1998). Crisis construction and organizational learning: Capability building in catching-up at Hyundai motor. Organization Science, 9(4), 506-521. https://doi.org/ 10.1287/orsc.9.4.506
Kim, M. K., Park, M. C., Park, J. H., Kim, J., & Kim, E. (2018). The Role of Multidimensional Switching Barriers on the Cognitive and Affective Satisfaction-Loyalty Link in Mobile Communication Services: Coupling in Moderating Effects. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 212-223.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.024
Kim, S. S., & Malhotra, N. K. (2005). A longitudinal model of continued IS use: An integrative view of four mechanisms underlying Postadoption phenomena. Management Science, 51(5), 741-755. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0326
Li, S. (2020). Leveraging recommendation systems for improving caching emerging short video in content delivery network. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, 31(11), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.4117
Li, Y., Deng, W., Liu, B., Shi, Y., Cao, Z., & Deng, H. (2011). Automaticity in distributed mobility management. 2011 IEEE GLOBECOM Workshops (GC Wkshps).
Lin, H. (2013). The effect of absorptive capacity perceptions on the context‐aware ubiquitous learning acceptance. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 30(4), 249-265. https://doi.org/10.1108/cwis-09-2012-0031
Lin, H.-F. (2011). An empirical investigation of mobile banking adoption: The effect of innovation attributes and knowledge-based trust. International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, 31(3), 252-260.
Matusik, S. F., & Heeley, M. B. (2005). Absorptive Capacity in the Software Industry: Identifying Dimensions That Affect Knowledge and Knowledge Creation Activities. Journal of Management, 31(4), 549-572.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304272293
Moon, J., & Kim, Y. (2001). Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Information & Management, 38(4), 217-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(00)00061-6
Muraliraj, J., Zailani, S., Kuppusamy, S., & Santha, C. (2017). Annotated methodological review of Lean Six Sigma. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 9(1), 1-10.
Murillo-Maldonado, J. M., Zeineddine, F. B., Stock, R., Thackeray, J., & Riesgo-Escovar, J. R. (2011). Insulin Receptor-Mediated Signaling via Phospholipase C-γ Regulates Growth and Differentiation in Drosophila. PLoS ONE, 6(11), e28067.
Ngcapu, S., Asare, K., & Osman, F. (2013). Incidence, recurrence, and prevalence of bacterial vaginosis from acute to chronic HIV infection in a prospective cohort of women in South Africa. Annals of Epidemiology, 82, 33-39.
Paola, T. M. U., Feroz Khan, G., Moon, J., & Jeung Rho, J. (2011). E-learning motivation and educational Portal acceptance in developing countries. Online Information Review, 35(1), 66-85. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111113597
Pedroso, R., Zanetello, L., Guimaraes, L., Pettenon, M., Goncalves, V., Scherer, J., Kessler, F., & Pechansky, F. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the crack use relapse scale (CURS). Archives of Clinical Psychiatry, 43(3), 37-40.
Pinsker, R. (2008). An empirical examination of competing theories to explain continuous disclosure technology adoption intentions using XBRL as the example technology. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research, 8(4), 81-96. https://doi.org/ 10.4192/1577-8517-v8_4
Salim, M., & Yadav, R. (2012). Capital Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from Malaysian Listed Companies. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65, 156-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.105
Samsudeen, S. N., & Mohamed, R. (2019). University students’ intention to use e-learning systems. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(3), 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1108/itse-11-2018-0092
Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The Social Dimensions of Entrepreneurship. Prentice-Hall.
Sica, C., & Ghisi, M. (2007). The Italian versions of the beck anxiety inventory and the beck depression inventory-II: Psychometric properties and discriminant power. In M. A. Lange (Ed.), Leading - edge psychological tests and testing research (pp. 27-50). Nova.
Straubhaar, J., & LaRose, R. (2008). Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology (1st ed.). Cengage Learning.
Sultan, A. S. (2018). The flipped classroom: An active teaching and learning strategy for making the sessions more interactive and challenging. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 68(4), 630-632.
Tantiponganant, P., & Laksitamas, P. (2014). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding students' behavioral intention to use university's social media. Proceedings of the 2014 IIAI 3rd International Conference on Advanced Applied Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1109/iiai-aai.2014.14
Teo, H., Chan, H., Wei, K., & Zhang, Z. (2003). Evaluating information accessibility and community adaptivity features for sustaining virtual learning communities. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(5), 671-697.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00087-9
Valaei, N., & Jiroudi, S. (2016). Job satisfaction and job performance in the media industry: A synergistic application of partial least squares path modelling. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 28(5), 984-1014.
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915. 2008.00192.x
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal Field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh, V., Morris, D., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 151-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
Williams, M. D., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): A literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(3), 443-488. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeim-09-2014-0088
Xu, B., Tang, X., Jin, M., Zhang, H., Du, L., Yu, S., & He, J. (2020). Unifying Developmental Programs for Embryonic and Post-Embryonic Neurogenesis in the Zebrafish Retina. Development (Cambridge, England), 147(12), 1-28.
Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The submitting author warrants that the submission is original and that she/he is the author of the submission together with the named co-authors; to the extend the submission incorporates text passages, figures, data, or other material from the work of others, the submitting author has obtained any necessary permission.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY What does this mean?). This is to get more legal certainty about what readers can do with published articles, and thus a wider dissemination and archiving, which in turn makes publishing with this journal more valuable for you, the authors.
