Cited by 205Mobile Learning in EducationTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourEducation and Technology Integration

Informal tools in formal contexts: Development of a model to assess the acceptance of mobile technologies among teachers

Open access
Sánchez-Prieto, José Carlos, Olmos-Migueláñez, Susana, García-Peñalvo, Francisco J.·2016·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.002

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sánchez-Prieto, J. C., Olmos-Migueláñez, S., & García-Peñalvo, F. J.
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-02
Volume
55
Pages
519-528
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2473382146
Cited by
205
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3
FWCI
39.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • Gredos (University of Salamanca) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
Keywords
mobile learning, technology acceptance, teachers, technology acceptance model, formal education, informal education, technology integration, research model, content validation, teacher intentions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review