Factors Impacting Behavioral Intention and Use Behavior of Undergraduate Students to Use English Learning Apps in Kunming, China
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Purpose: This study investigates the factors influencing the behavioral intention and use behavior of English learning apps among higher education students in Kunming, China. The conceptual framework incorporates variables such as perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude, perceived behavioral control, social influence, behavioral intention, and use behavior. Research design, data, and methodology: The target population consists of 500 undergraduate students from the top three universities in Kunming, China. The research employed a quantitative approach, utilizing a questionnaire as the primary data collection tool. Sampling techniques included judgmental, stratified random, and convenience sampling. To ensure validity and reliability, a pilot test involving 50 participants was conducted, assessing the item-objective congruence (IOC) index for validity and Cronbach's alpha for reliability. The data collected were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) as the main statistical analyses for this study. Results: Perceived ease of use significantly impacts attitude and perceived usefulness. Perceived usefulness significantly impacts attitude. Behavioral intention is significantly impacted by attitude, perceived behavioral control, and social influence. Furthermore, behavioral intention has a significant impact on use behavior. Conclusions: The results are valued to entrepreneurs or developers of English learning apps who are looking for opportunities in mobile education
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 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.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice- Hall.
Akbar, F. (2013). What affects students’ acceptance and use of technology? Dietrich College Honors Theses [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. Carnegie Mellon University.
Alain, F., Gailly, B., Clerc, L., & Portal, A. (2006). Assessing the Impact of Entrepreneurship Education Programmes: A New Methodology. Journal of European Industrial Training 30(9), 1-10.
Al-Mamary, Y. H. S., Siddiqui, M. A., Abdalraheem, S. G., Jazim, F., Abdulrab, M., Rashed, R. Q., Alquhaif, A. S., & Aliyu Alhaji, A. (2023). Factors impacting Saudi students’ intention to adopt learning management systems using the TPB and UTAUT integrated model. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-04-2022-0068
Attuquayefio, S., & Addo, H. (2014). Review of studies with UTAUT as conceptual framework. European Scientific Journal, 10(8), 249-258.
Bajaj, A., & Nidumolu, S. R. (1998). A Feedback Model to Understand Information System Usage. Information & Management, 33, 213-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00026-3
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Beyari, H. M. (2018). The Interaction of Trust and Social Influence Factors in the Social Commerce Environment (3rd ed.). Springer.
Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Calisir, F., Altin, G. C., Bayraktaroglu, A., & Karaali, D. (2014). Predicting the Intention to Use a Web-Based Learning System: Perceived Content Quality, Anxiety, Perceived System Quality, Image, and the Technology Acceptance Model. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 24(5), 515–531. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20548
Camarero, C., Rodríguez, J., & San José, R. (2012). An exploratory study of online forums as a collaborative learning tool. Online Information Review, 36(4), 568-586. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521211254077
Chao, C.-M., & Yu, T.-K. (2019). The moderating effect of technology optimism: How it affects students’ weblog learning. Online Information Review, 43(1), 161-180. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-11-2016-0316
Chen, P., Chavez, O., Ong, D. C., & Gunderson, B. (2017). Strategic resource use for learning: A self-administered intervention that guides self-reflection on effective resource use enhances academic performance. Psychological science, 28(6), 774-785.
Davis, F. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Escobar-Rodriguez, T., & Monge-Lozano, P. (2012). The Acceptance of Moodle Technology by Business Administration Students. Computer & Education, 58, 1085-1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.012
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Gunasinghe, A., Hamid, J. A., Khatibi, A., & Azam, S. M. F. (2020). The adequacy of UTAUT-3 in interpreting academician’s adoption to e-Learning in higher education environments. Interactive Technology and Smart, 17(1), 86-106. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2019-0020
Hill, R. W. (2012). Animal Physiology. Sinauer Associates, 8(1), 1-10.
Hsu, H. H. (2012). The acceptance of moodle: an empirical study based on UTAUT. Creative Education, 3(8), 44-46.
Hu, T., Zhang, D., & Wang, J. (2015). A Meta-Analysis of the Trait Resilience and Mental Health. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.039
Ilyas, A., & Zaman, M. K. (2020). An Evaluation of Online Students' Persistence Intentions. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(2), 207-222.
Karaali, D., Gumussoy, C. A., & Calisir, F. (2011). Factors affecting the intention to use a web-based learning system among blue-collar workers in the automotive industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 343-354.
Kim, Y. G., & Woo, E. (2016). Consumer acceptance of a quick response (QR) code for the food traceability system: Application of an extended technology acceptance model (TAM). Food Research International, 85, 266–272.
Lee, D. Y., & Lehto, M. R. (2013). User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education, 61, 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.001
Lee, M. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: an extension of the expectation-confirmation model. Computers & Education, 54(2), 506-516.
Lee, Y.-C. (2006). An Empirical Investigation into Factors Influencing the Adoption of an e-Learning System. Online Information Review, 30(5), 517-541.
https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520610706406
Liaw, S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: a case study of the blackboard system. Computers and Education, 51(2), 864-873.
Lohr, S. (2019). Sampling: Design and analysis. Cengage Learning.
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11(3), 320–341.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
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.
Qimai. (n.d.). App Store Live Observatory – China. https://www.qimai.cn
Sánchez, R. A., & Hueros, A. D. (2010). Motivational Factors that Influence the Acceptance of Moodle Using TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1632-1640.
Sharma, G. P., Verma, R. C., & Pathare, P. (2005). Mathematical modeling of infrared radiation thin layer drying of onion slices. Journal of Food Engineering, 71(3), 282–286.
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.
Singh, R., & Tewari, A. (2021). Modeling factors affecting online learning adoption: mediating role of attitude. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(7), 1405-1420. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2021-0198
Soper, D. S. (2023). A-priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models [Software]. www.danielsoper.com/statcalc/default.aspx
Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Sumak, B., Polancic, G., & Hericko, M. (2010). An Empirical Study of Virtual Learning Environment Adoption Using UTAUT. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, and On-Line Learning (ELML’10) (pp. 17-22). IEEE.
Sun, Y. (2019). Consumer Evaluation of the Quality of Online Health Information: Systematic Literature Review of Relevant Criteria and Indicators. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(5), 12522. https://doi.org/10.2196/12522
Terzis, V., Moridis, C. N., & Economides, A. A. (2012). The effect of emotional feedback on behavioral intention to use computer-based assessment. Computers & Education, 59(2), 710-721.
Thi, H. P., Tran, Q. N., La, L. G., Doan, H. M., & Vu, T. D. (2023). Factors motivating students' intention to accept online learning in emerging countries: the case study of Vietnam. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 15(2), 324-341. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-05-2021-0191
Ukut, I. I. T. (2018). Justifying students’ performance: A comparative study of both ICT students’ and instructors’ perspective. Interactive Technology and Smart Education 16(12), 1-10.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
Wang, L., Wang, X., Liang, N., & Xiao, M. (2010). How to Make Highly Rational Use of Modern Educational Technologies. Intelligent Information Management, 2(11), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.4236/iim.2010.211074
Wu, H. (2023). Drivers of Attitudes toward Online Purchase Intention Among Residents of Taiyuan in China. AU-GSB E-JOURNAL, 16(1), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.14456/augsbejr.2023.4
Wu, J. H., & Wang, Y. M. (2006). Measuring KMS success: A respecification of the DeLone and McLean’s model. Information and Management, 43(6), 728–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.002
Yu, K., & Huang, G. (2020). Exploring consumers’ intent to use smart libraries with technology acceptance model. The Electronic Library, 38(3), 447-461. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-08-2019-0188
Zhong, K., Feng, D., Yang, M., & Jaruwanakul, T. (2022). Determinants of Attitude, Satisfaction and Behavioral Intention of Online Learning Usage Among Students During COVID-19. AU-GSB E-JOURNAL, 15(2), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.14456/augsbejr.2022.71