Abstract
With the explosive growth of various applications on the Internet, higher education institutions have advocated distance learning courses, making research on online learning increasingly important. This study attempts to emphasize the characteristics of instruction in online learning systems, using the Theory of Planned Behavior. Two groups of learners were targeted: those who had taken online education courses for more than one semester (more experienced) and those who had just started with less than two weeks of course experience (less experienced). Two benchmark models of “learner behavioral intentions in online learning” were constructed and tested for stability and invariance using structural equation modeling. The findings show that the covariance matrices of the participating groups and cross-group samples in online learning demonstrated invariance. Finally, the study suggests that educational institutions and e-learning platform developers should focus resources on key factors that enhance user acceptance and satisfaction. The study stresses the importance of consistently meeting learners’ fundamental needs for ease of use, usefulness, and enjoyment, regardless of their changing specific needs. Therefore, e-learning platforms can cater to a wide range of learners, thereby improving the educational landscape.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The collected data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.
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. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
Alamin, A. A., Wilkin, C. L., Yeoh, W., & Warren, M. (2020). The impact of self-efficacy on accountants’ behavioral intention to adopt and use accounting information systems. Journal of Information Systems, 34(3), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-52617
Alfadda, H. A., & Mahdi, H. S. (2021). Measuring students’ use of zoom application in language course based on the technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(4), 883–900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09752-1
Alwin, D. F., & Jackson, D. J. (1981). Applications of simultaneous factor analysis to issues of factorial invariance. Factor Analysis and Measurement in Sociological Research: A Multidimensional Perspective, 249–280. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.3.562
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Arkorful, V. E., Hammond, A., Lugu, B. K., Basiru, I., Sunguh, K. K., & Charmaine-Kwade, P. (2022). Investigating the intention to use technology among medical students: An application of an extended model of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(2), e2460. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2460
Babin, B. J., & Svensson, G. (2012). Structural equation modeling in social science research: Issues of validity and reliability in the research process. European Business Review, 24(4), 320–330. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555341211242132
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986(23–28).
Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(95)00038-0
Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in Structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. psychology press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203774762
Cao, G., Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). Understanding managers’ attitudes and behavioral intentions towards using artificial intelligence for organizational decision-making. Technovation, 106, 102312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102312
Chai, C. S., Lin, P. Y., Jong, M. S. Y., Dai, Y., Chiu, T. K., & Qin, J. (2021). Perceptions of and behavioral intentions towards learning artificial intelligence in primary school students. Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 89–101. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27032858
Chang, Y. P., & Zhu, D. H. (2011). Understanding social networking sites adoption in China: A comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1840–1848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.006
Chen, L., & Aklikokou, A. K. (2020). Determinants of E-government adoption: Testing the mediating effects of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(10), 850–865. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1660989
Chen, P. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2019). An empirical examination of the effect of self-regulation and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) factors on the online learning behavioural intention of college students. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 39(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2019.1575184
Cole, D. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (1985). Multitrait-multimethod comparisons across populations: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 20(4), 389–417. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2004_3
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 189–211. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688
Conroy, D. E., & Motl, R. W. (2003). Modification, cross-validation, invariance, and latent mean structure of the self-presentation in exercise questionnaire. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327841MPEE0701_1
Correia, A. P., Liu, C., & Xu, F. (2020). Evaluating videoconferencing systems for the quality of the educational experience. Distance Education, 41(4), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1821607
Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18(2), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1802_2
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
De Lorenzis, F., Pratticò, F. G., Repetto, M., Pons, E., & Lamberti, F. (2023). Immersive virtual reality for procedural training: Comparing traditional and learning by teaching approaches. Computers in Industry, 144, 103785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2022.103785
de Rooij, M., & Weeda, W. (2020). Cross-validation: A method every psychologist should know. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(2), 248–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919898466
Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model with task–technology fit constructs. Information & Management, 36(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00101-3
Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the end-user Computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 453–461. https://doi.org/10.2307/249524
Doll, W. J., Hendrickson, A., & Deng, X. (1998). Using Davis’s perceived usefulness and ease-of‐use instruments for decision making: A confirmatory and multigroup invariance analysis. Decision Sciences, 29(4), 839–869. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.tb00879.x
Durvasula, S., Andrews, J. C., Lysonski, S., & Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Assessing the cross-national applicability of consumer behavior models: A model of attitude toward advertising in general. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4), 626–636. https://doi.org/10.1086/209327
Egami, N., & Hartman, E. (2023). Elements of external validity: Framework, design, and analysis. American Political Science Review, 117(3), 1070–1088. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055422000880
Eryilmaz, N., & Sandoval Hernandez, A. (2022). Improving cross-cultural comparability: Does school leadership mean the same in different countries? Educational Studies, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2021.2013777
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. In: Sage Publications Sage CA.
Gómez-Ramirez, I., Valencia-Arias, A., & Duque, L. (2019). Approach to M-learning acceptance among university students: An integrated model of TPB and TAM. International Review of Research in open and Distributed Learning, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4061
Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572–2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864
Hair, J. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis.
Ho, J. C., Wu, C. G., Lee, C. S., & Pham, T. T. T. (2020). Factors affecting the behavioral intention to adopt mobile banking: An international comparison. Technology in Society, 63, 101360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101360
Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610739208253916
Hult, G. T. M., Ketchen, D. J., Griffith, D. A., Finnegan, C. A., Gonzalez-Padron, T., Harmancioglu, N., Huang, Y., Talay, M. B., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2008). Data equivalence in cross-cultural international business research: Assessment and guidelines. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 1027–1044. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400396
Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., & Chervany, N. L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 183–213. https://doi.org/10.2307/249751
Kemp, R. (2000). Technology and Environmental Policy—Innovation effects of past policies and suggestions for improvement. Innovation and the Environment, 1, 35–61.
Kumar, J. A., Bervell, B., Annamalai, N., & Osman, S. (2020). Behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the role of self-efficacy, subjective norm, and WhatsApp use habit. IEEE Access, 8, 208058–208074. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3037925
Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2022). SOLOMON: A method for splitting a sample into equivalent subsamples in factor analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 54(6), 2665–2677. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01750-y
Mlekus, L., Bentler, D., Paruzel, A., Kato-Beiderwieden, A. L., & Maier, G. W. (2020). How to raise technology acceptance: User experience characteristics as technology-inherent determinants. Gruppe Interaktion Organisation Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 51(3), 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-020-00529-7
Mohler, P. P., & Johnson, T. P. (2010). Equivalence, comparability, and methodological progress. Survey Methods in Multinational Multiregional and Multicultural Contexts, 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927.ch2
Park, J., Liu, D., Mun, Y. Y., & Santhanam, R. (2019). GAMESIT: A gamified system for information technology training. Computers & Education, 142, 103643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103643
Roh, T., Seok, J., & Kim, Y. (2022). Unveiling ways to reach organic purchase: Green perceived value, perceived knowledge, attitude, subjective norm, and trust. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 67, 102988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102988
Saleem, M., Kamarudin, S., Shoaib, H. M., & Nasar, A. (2023). Influence of augmented reality app on intention towards e-learning amidst COVID-19 pandemic. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(5), 3083–3097. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1919147
Salloum, S. A., Alhamad, A. Q. M., Al-Emran, M., Monem, A. A., & Shaalan, K. (2019). Exploring students’ acceptance of e-learning through the development of a comprehensive technology acceptance model. IEEE Access, 7, 128445–128462. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2939467
Silic, M., & Lowry, P. B. (2020). Using design-science based gamification to improve organizational security training and compliance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(1), 129–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2019.1705512
Sun, S., Law, R., & Schuckert, M. (2020). Mediating effects of attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control for mobile payment-based hotel reservations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 84, 102331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102331
Tam, C., Loureiro, A., & Oliveira, T. (2020). The individual performance outcome behind e-commerce: Integrating information systems success and overall trust. Internet Research, 30(2), 439–462. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-06-2018-0262
Teo, T. S., Lim, V. K., & Lai, R. Y. (1999). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in internet usage. Omega, 27(1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(98)00028-0
Ursavaş, Ö. F., Yalçın, Y., & Bakır, E. (2019). The effect of subjective norms on preservice and in-service teachers’ behavioural intentions to use technology: A multigroup multimodel study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2501–2519. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12834
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
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1993). Turning work into play: Implications for microcomputer software training. Journal of Management, 19(1), 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-2063(93)90049-S
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Ho Chi Minh City University of Economics and Finance (UEF), Vietnam for funding this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Conflicts of interest
All the authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Pham Thi, T., Duong, N. E-learning behavioral intention among college students: A comparative study. Educ Inf Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12592-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12592-4