Cited by 157Mobile Learning in EducationTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies

Exploring students' awareness and perceptions: Influencing factors and individual differences driving m-learning adoption

Sabah, Nasser M.·2016·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.009

Cites

5 of 5 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?

  • PU and PEOU were measured with three items each, adapted from Davis (1989) and adapted to ChatGPT uses from Pillai et al. (2023) and Sabah (2016).

    “Two major variables of the TAM were measured with three items each (Davis, 1989) and the statements were adapted to the uses of ChatGPT (Pillai et al., 2023; Sabah, 2016).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sabah, N. M.
Affiliations
Palestine Technical College (PS)
Corresponding author
Sabah, Nasser M.
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
65
Pages
522-533
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2519515778
Cited by
157
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 3
FWCI
30.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
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 › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
Keywords
mobile learning, mobile learning adoption, technology acceptance, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, social influence, individual differences, behavioral intention, students, higher education

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