Cited by 109Technology Adoption and User BehaviourOnline and Blended LearningTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies

Nursing students’ behavioral intention to use online courses: A questionnaire survey

Tung, Feng-Cheng, Chang, Su-Chao·2008·International Journal of Nursing Studies

Abstract

Background The development of network communication science and technology has accorded a special benefit to learning. Online courses have also become the most popular and important learning resource among students.Objectives Overall, this research aims to explore what are the important factors making students use online courses.Design The research combines the technology acceptance model and the innovation diffusion theory, and adds four research variables, computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy, perceived financial cost and perceived information quality to propose a new hybrid technology acceptance model to study students' behavioral intention to use online courses.Settings Based on 228 questionnaires collected from nursing students in Taiwan.Methods The structural equation modeling technique was used to evaluate the causal model and confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the reliability and validity of the measurement model.Participants The survey began with e-mail and telephone interviews in January 2006. The interviewees were 348 students of Taiwan's universities. Because some of the replying subjects have never taken those courses and some did not complete the questionnaires, there were 228 valid questionnaires from students of Taiwan's universities who have taken online courses. The responding rate was 65.52%.Results This research found that computer anxiety had a negative effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses (gamma=-0.21, P<0.01). Computer self-efficacy had a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses (gamma=0.37, P<0.01). Compatibility had a positive effect on both the behavioral intention to use online courses (gamma=0.18, P<0.01) and perceived usefulness (gamma=0.3, P<0.01). Perceived usefulness had a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses (beta=0.14, P<0.05). Perceived ease of use had a positive effect on perceived usefulness (gamma=0.23, P<0.01), the behavioral intention to use online courses (gamma=0.24, P<0.01). Perceived financial cost had a negative effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses (gamma=-0.16, P<0.01). Perceived information quality had a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses (gamma=0.11, P<0.05). The findings of this research help to develop more user friendly online courses for students.Conclusions (1) Computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy, compatibility, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived financial cost, and perceived information quality were the critical factors that impacted on students' behavioral intention to use online courses. (2) Computer anxiety and perceived financial cost had a negative effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses. (3) The present study added four new research constructs (computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy, perceived financial cost, and perceived information quality) to the research model so that it would be more complete; this improved the fit of the whole model. (4) Computer self-efficacy, compatibility, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived information quality had a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use online courses. By explaining students' behavioral intention from a user's perspective, the findings of this research help to provide insight into the best way to promote new e-learning tools for students.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.09.011

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tung, F.-C., & Chang, S.-C.
Affiliations
  • Taiwan Shoufu University (TW)
  • National Cheng Kung University (TW)
Corresponding author
Tung, Feng-Cheng
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-09
Volume
45
Issue
9
Pages
1299-1309
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2081816477
Cited by
109
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
Keywords
online courses, behavioral intention, nursing students, technology acceptance model, diffusion of innovation theory, computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy, perceived financial cost, perceived information quality, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, compatibility, e-learning adoption, Taiwan universities, e-learning in higher education
MeSH terms
Humans, Models, Theoretical, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Nursing, Taiwan, Education, Distance

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