The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting the actual use of m-learning systems: a comparative approach using PLS-SEM and machine learning algorithms
Abstract
Despite the plethora of m-learning acceptance studies, few have tackled the importance of examining the actual use of m-learning systems from the lenses of social influence, expectation-confirmation, and satisfaction. Additionally, most of the prior technology adoption literature tends to use the structural equation modeling (SEM) technique in analyzing the structural models. To address these limitations, this study extends the technology acceptance model (TAM) with the expectation-confirmation model (ECM) and social influence to predict the actual use of m-learning systems. A comparative approach using the partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and machine learning algorithms was employed to test the proposed model with data collected from 448 students. The results revealed that both techniques have successfully provided support to all the hypothesized relationships of the research model. More interesting, the J48 classifier has performed better than the other classifiers in predicting the dependent variable in most cases. The employment of a comparative analytical approach is believed to add a significant contribution to the information systems (IS) literature in general, and the m-learning domain in specific.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 · Cited by 38,459
Herne, H., Cooley, W. W., & Lohnes, P. R. (1973) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2344428 · Cited by 35,697
A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)
Leguina, A. (2015) · International Journal of Research & Method in Education · doi:10.1080/1743727x.2015.1005806 · Cited by 18,921
(1998) · DigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University) · Cited by 13,997
Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling
Etikan, I. (2016) · American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics · doi:10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11 · Cited by 11,412
Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model1
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250921 · Cited by 8,767 · cited 12×
“Continuous intention (CI) is de fi ned as “ users ’ intention to continue using the information system ” (Bhattacherjee, 2001).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Cited by
Shopping in the digital world: How augmented reality mobile applications trigger customer engagement
Lin, K.-Y., & Huang, T. K. (2024) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102540 · Cited by 66
Liu, Y.-L. E., & Huang, Y.-M. (2025) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2311975 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Alshurideh, M., Al Kurdi, B., Salloum, S. A., Arpaci, I., & Al-Emran, M.
- Venue
- Interactive Learning Environments
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-10-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1214-1228
- ISSN
- 1049-4820 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5191
- OpenAlex
- W3090401460
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 34.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting the actual use of m-learning systems: a comparative approach using PLS-SEM and machine learning algorithms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10494820.2020.1826982
- The paper
- Alshurideh, M., Al Kurdi, B., Salloum, S. A., Arpaci, I., & Al-Emran, M. (2023). Predicting the actual use of m-learning systems: a comparative approach using PLS-SEM and machine learning algorithms. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1826982
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.