CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 435Technology Adoption and User BehaviourTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesOnline and Blended Learning

Integrating Technology Acceptance Model With Innovation Diffusion Theory: An Empirical Investigation on Students’ Intention to Use E-Learning Systems

Open access
Al-Rahmi, Waleed Mugahed, Yahaya, Noraffandy, Aldraiweesh, Ahmed A., Alamri, Mahdi M., Aljarboa, Nada Ali, Alturki, Uthman, Aljeraiwi, Abdulmajeed A.·2019·IEEE Access
DOI 10.1109/access.2019.2899368
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper aims to explore and investigate the potential factors influencing students' behavioral intentions to use the e-learning system. This paper proposes an extended technology acceptance model (TAM) that has been tested and examined through the use of both innovation diffusion theory (IDT) and integrating TAM. This paper was conducted on 1286 students utilizing systems of e-learning in Malaysia. The findings were obtained via a quantitative research method. The findings illustrate that six perceptions of innovation characteristics, in particular, have impacts on students' e-learning system behavioral intention. The influences of the relative advantages, observability, trialability, perceived compatibility, complexity, and perceived enjoyment on the perceived ease of use is noteworthy. Moreover, the effects of the relative advantages, complexity, trialability, observability, perceived compatibility, and perceived enjoyment on the perceived usefulness have a strong impact. Therefore, the empirical results provide strong backing to the integrative approach between TAM and IDT. The findings suggest an extended model of TAM with IDT for the acceptance of the e-learning system used to improve the students' learning performance, which can help decision makers in higher education, universities, as well as colleges to evaluate, plan and execute the use of e-learning systems.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2019.2899368

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Collaboration for learning utilizing social media like Facebook, Twitter, and e-mail enables learning or knowledge sharing between teachers, students, and instructors in practical life.

    “In addition, collaboration for learning utilizing the social media like Facebook, Twitter, and e-mail enable learning or knowledge sharing between teachers, students, and instructors in practical life [18].”

    From Integrated Three Theories to Develop a Model of Factors Affecting Students' Academic Performance in Higher Education (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Introduction (page not provided) says e-learning lets teachers and students communicate and gives students access to knowledge resources. It does not establish that collaboration through Facebook, Twitter, or e-mail enables the claimed learning or knowledge sharing. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The above factors increase the students/researchers' activities in universities through collaboration and communication for learning and sequentially improve learning performance.

    “Therefore, it can be de ned that the above factors [101] increase the students/researchers' activities in universities through collaboration and communication for learning [18] and sequentially, improve learning performance [11], [46].”

    From Integrated Three Theories to Develop a Model of Factors Affecting Students' Academic Performance in Higher Education (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion and Implications section reports that factors such as perceived enjoyment, usefulness and ease of use increase students’ intention to use e-learning, and links that use to learning performance. It does not show that those factors increase students’ or researchers’ activities through collaboration and communication. In the citing sentence, separate citations are attached to collaboration and to learning performance; this verdict concerns the claim attached to this source. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Interaction is an important part of training procedure which helps researchers' proactivity at classrooms throughout active collaboration for learning.

    “In this case interaction indicates to an important part of training procedure which helps researchers' proactivity at classrooms throughout active collaboration for learning [11], [18], [100].”

    From Integrated Three Theories to Develop a Model of Factors Affecting Students' Academic Performance in Higher Education (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Introduction (page not provided) describes e-learning as training that includes audiovisual interaction and communication between teachers and students. It does not say that interaction promotes researchers’ proactivity in classrooms through active collaboration; it instead distinguishes individual online study from classroom study groups. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The finding that collaboration learning positively relates to academic performance agrees with previous studies.

    “This agrees with the previous studies [3], [5], [18], [19], [43], [46], [53], [58], [63], [101].”

    From Integrated Three Theories to Develop a Model of Factors Affecting Students' Academic Performance in Higher Education (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion and Implications section links e-learning use to improved student performance, but does not address whether collaborative learning is positively related to academic performance. The References list includes works about collaborative learning and performance; their titles alone do not establish that this paper reports the claimed relationship. Searched for collaborative learning and academic performance. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Social media network usage facilitates to build positive relation amid students' educational performance and students' satisfaction.

    “In addition, social media network usage facilitates to build positive relation amid students' educational performance and students' satisfaction [3], [4], [18], [43].”

    From Integrated Three Theories to Develop a Model of Factors Affecting Students' Academic Performance in Higher Education (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion and Implications section links e-learning use to students’ learning performance, but does not establish the claimed relationship involving social media use, performance, and satisfaction. Searches for social media, satisfaction, and learning performance found related works in the References and separate discussion of these topics, but no passage stating the claimed relationship. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 57 · Cited by 435

Research works printed but not linked: 57

  1. H. R. Amado-Salvatierra, J. R. Hilera, S. O. Tortosa, R. H. Rizzardini, and N. Piedra, ''Towards a semantic definition of a framework to implement accessible e-learning projects,'' J. Univ. Comput. Sci., vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 921-942, 2016.
  2. S.-S. Liaw and H.-M. Huang, ''Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e- learning environments,'' Comput. Edu., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 14-24, 2013.
  3. V. Chang, ''Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry,'' Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 476-485, 2016.
  4. F. A. de MeloPereira, A. S. MartinsRamos, M. A. Gouvêa, and M. F. da Costa, ''Satisfaction and continuous use intention of e-learning service in Brazilian public organizations,'' Comput. Hum. Behav., vol. 46, pp. 139-148, May 2015.
  5. C.-S. Ong, J.-Y. Lai, and Y.-S. Wang, ''Factors affecting engineers' accep- tance of asynchronous e-learning systems in high-tech companies,'' Inf. Manage., vol. 41, pp. 795-804, Jul. 2004.
  6. J. G. Chaka and I. Govender, ''Students' perceptions and readiness towards mobile learning in colleges of education: A Nigerian perspective,'' South Afr. J. Educ., vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2017.
  7. K. A. Pituch and Y.-K. Lee, ''The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use,'' Comput. Educ., vol. 47, pp. 222-244, Sep. 2006.
  8. Y.-H. Lee, Y.-C. Hsieh, and C.-N. Hsu, ''Adding innovation diffusion theory to the technology acceptance model: Supporting employees' inten- tions to use e-learning systems,'' J. Educ. Technol. Soc., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 124-137, 2011.
  9. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, ''User accep- tance of information technology: Toward a unified view,'' MIS Quart., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425-478, 2003.
  10. W. M. Al-Rahmi, M. S. Othman, and L. M. Yusuf, ''Exploring the fac- tors that affect student satisfaction through using e-learning in Malaysian higher education institutions,'' Medit. J. Social Sci., vol. 6, no. 4, p. 299, 2015. doi: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4s1p299. · DOI
  11. M. Al-Qahtani, M. Al-Qahtani, and H. Al-Misehal, ''Learner satisfaction of e-learning in workplace: Case of oil company in Middle East,'' in Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Inf. Technol., New Gener. (ITNG), 2013, pp. 294-298.
  12. H. Mohammadi, ''Investigating users' perspectives on e-learning: An inte- gration of TAM and IS success model,'' Comput. Hum. Behav., vol. 45, pp. 359-374, Apr. 2015.
  13. A. Tarhini, K. Hone, and X. Liu, ''Extending the TAM model to empir- ically investigate the students' behavioural intention to use e-learning in developing countries,'' in Proc. Sci. Inf. Conf. (SAI), 2013, pp. 732-737.
  14. T.-H. Chu and Y.-Y. Chen, ''With good we become good: Understanding e-learning adoption by theory of planned behavior and group influences,'' Comput. Educ., vol. 92, pp. 37-52, Jan./Feb. 2016.
  15. Ş. B. Tosuntaş, B. E. Karadağ, and S. Orhan, ''The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the Unified Theory of acceptance and use of technology,'' Comput. Educ., vol. 81, pp. 169-178, Feb. 2015.
  16. W. M. Al-Rahmi, M. S. Othman, and M. A. Musa, ''The improvement of students' academic performance by using social media through collabora- tive learning in Malaysian higher education,'' Asian Social Sci., vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 210-221, 2014.
  17. E. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 4th Ed. New York, NY, USA: Free Press, 1995.
  18. F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw, ''User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models,'' Manage. Sci., vol. 35, pp. 982-1003, Aug. 1989.
  19. M. A. Hameed, S. Counsell, and S. Swift, ''A conceptual model for the process of IT innovation adoption in organizations,'' J. Eng. Technol. Manage., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 358-390, 2012.
  20. B. Puklavec, T. Oliveira, and A. Popovič, ''Unpacking business intelli- gence systems adoption determinants: An exploratory study of small and medium enterprises,'' Econ. Bus. Rev., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 185-213, 2014.
  21. X. Li, M. D. Troutt, A. Brandyberry, and T. Wang, ''Decision factors for the adoption and continued use of online direct sales channels among SMEs,'' J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-31, 2011.
  22. W. M. Al-Rahmi, M. S. Othman, and L. M. Yusuf, ''The effect of social media on researchers' academic performance through collaborative learn- ing in Malaysian higher education,'' Medit. J. Social Sci., vol. 6, no. 4, p. 193, 2015.
  23. J. H. Wu and S. C. Wang, ''What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model,'' Inf. Manag., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 719-729, 2005.
  24. M. L. Gillenson and D. L. Sherrell, ''Enticing online consumers: An extended technology acceptance perspective,'' Inf. Manage., vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 705-719, 2002.
  25. D. Gefen, ''What makes an ERP implementation relationship worthwhile: Linking trust mechanisms and ERP usefulness,'' J. Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 263-288, 2004.
  26. A. Dillon and M. G. Morris, ''User acceptance of new information technol- ogy: Theories and models, Follow Methodologies,'' J. Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 123-151, 1996.
  27. Y. H. Lee, ''Exploring key factors that affect consumers to adopt e- reading services,'' M.S. Thesis, Dept. Inf. Service Economy, Huafan Univ., New Taipei City, Taiwan, 2007.
  28. P. E. Tobbin, ''Modeling adoption of mobile money transfer: A consumer behaviour analysis,'' in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Mobile Commun. Technol.
  29. Develop., M.S. Thesis, Dept. Planning, Nat. Sun Yat-Sen Univ., Kampala, Uganda, 2010.
  30. B. C. Hardgrave, F. D. Davis, and C. K. Riemenschneider, ''Investigating determinants of software developers' intentions to follow methodologies,'' J. Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 123-151, 2003.
  31. C. H. Shih, ''Integrating Innovation Diffusion Theory and UTAUT to explore the influencing factors on teacher adopt e-learning system-with MOODLE as an example,'' M.S. thesis, Dept. Inf. Syst., Dayeh Univ., Changhua County, Taiwan, 2007.
  32. M. M. Yang, ''An exploratory study on consumers' behavioral intention of usage of third generation mobile value-added services,'' M.S. thesis, Dept. Inf. Syst., Nat. Cheng Kung Univ. Tainan City, Taiwan, 2007.
  33. L. Y. Huang, ''A study about the key factors affecting users to accept Chunghwa Telecom's Multimedia on Demand,'' M.S. thesis, Dept. Inf. Syst., Nat. Sun Yat-Sen Univ., 2004.
  34. S.-C. Chang and F.-C. Tung, ''An empirical investigation of students' behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites,'' Brit. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 71-83, 2008.
  35. R. Agarwal and J. Prasad, ''Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies?'' Decis. Sci., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 361-391, 1999.
  36. H. Van der Heijden, ''User acceptance of hedonic information systems,'' MIS Quart., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 695-704, 2004.
  37. J. H. Al-Ammary, A. K. Al-Sherooqi, and H. K. Al-Sherooqi, ''The accep- tance of social networking as a learning tools at University of Bahrain,'' Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 208-214, 2014.
  38. S. Alharbi and S. Drew, ''Using the technology acceptance model in under- standing academics' behavioural intention to use learning management systems,'' Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 143-155, 2014.
  39. J. Preece, Online Communities: Designing Usability and Supporting Sociability. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2000.
  40. V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, ''A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies,'' Manage. Sci., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186-204, 2000.
  41. V. Venkatesh, J. Y. L. Thong, and X. Xu, ''Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology,'' MIS Quart., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 157-178, 2012.
  42. E. L. Pelling, and K. M. White, ''The theory of planned behavior applied to young people's use of social networking web sites,'' CyberPsychol. Behav.; vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 755-759, 2009.
  43. A. Alzahrani, B. C. Stahl, and M. Prior, ''Developing an instrument for e-public services' acceptance using confirmatory factor analysis: Mid- dle East context,'' J. Organizational End User Comput., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 18-44, 2012.
  44. J. F. Hair, M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, and J. A. Mena, ''An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research,'' J. Acad. Marketing Sci., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 414-433, 2012.
  45. E. Karahanna, D. Straub, and N. L. Chervany, ''Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs,'' MIS Quart., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 183-213, 1999.
  46. B. M. Byrne, Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Routledge, 2010.
  47. R. Kline, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed. New York, NY, USA: The Guilford Press, 2011.
  48. R. P. Bagozzi, Y. Yi, and K. D. Nassen, ''Representation of measurement error in marketing variables: Review of approaches and extension to three- facet designs,'' J. Econ., vol. 89, nos. 1-2, pp. 393-421, 1998.
  49. C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, ''Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error,'' J. Marketing Res., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39-50, 1981.
  50. W. M. Al-Rahmi, N. Yahaya, M. M. Alamri, N. A. Aljarboa, Y. B. Kamin, and M. S. B. Saud, ''How cyber stalking and cyber bullying affect stu- dents' open learning,'' IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 20199-20210, 2019. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2891853. · DOI
  51. W. M. Al-Rahmi, N. Yahaya, M. M. Alamri, N. A. Aljarboa, Y. B. Kamin, and F. A. Moafa, ''A model of factors affecting cyber bullying behaviors among University students,'' IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 2978-2985, 2018. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2881292. · DOI · Paper page
  52. W. M. Al-Rahmi, M. S. Othman, and L. M. Yusuf, ''Using social media for research: The role of interactivity, collaborative learning, and engagement on the performance of students in Malaysian post-secondary institutes,'' Medit. J. Social Sci., vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 536-546, 2015. doi: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n5s2p536. · DOI
  53. W. M. Al-Rahmi, M. S. Othman, and L. M. Yusuf, ''Effect of engagement and collaborative learning on satisfaction through the use of social media on malaysian higher education,'' Res. J. Appl. Sci., Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 1132-1142, 2015.
  54. W. M. Al-Rahmi and A. M. Zeki ''A model of using social media for collaborative learning to enhance learners' performance on learning,'' J. King Saud Univ.-Comput. Inf. Sci., vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 526-535, 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.jksuci.2016.09.002.2016. · DOI
  55. A. D. Carswell and V. Venkatesh, ''Learner outcomes in an asynchronous distance education environment,'' Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., vol. 56, pp. 475-494, May 2002.
  56. W. M. Al-Rahmi, N. Alias, M. S. Othman, V. I. Marin, and G. Tur, ''A model of factors affecting learning performance through the use of social media in Malaysian higher education,'' Comput. Educ., vol. 121, pp. 59-72, Jun. 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.010. · DOI · Paper page
  57. NORAFFANDY YAHAYA received the Ph.D. degree in computer-based learning from the Uni- versity of Leeds, U.K. He was the Head of the Department of Educational Science, Mathematics and Creative Multimedia for nine years. He has been an Associate Professor with the Faculty of Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, since 2013. He has conducted studies on students' inter- action in online learning environment, learning analytics, and massive open online courses. He has published more than 70 papers in journals and conferences proceedings in the research areas of online learning, ICT in education, and the use of technology in teaching and learning. He has been a Supervisor for more than 25 completed master's degree students and seven completed Ph.D. students in the areas of educational technology, online learning, and ICT in education. He had been appointed as an external examiner for universities in Malaysia and Australia for doctoral theses and an assessor for master's dissertation for university in New Zealand. His research interests include multimedia in education, online learning, and ICT in education.

Authors
Al-Rahmi, W. M., Yahaya, N., Aldraiweesh, A. A., Alamri, M. M., Aljarboa, N. A., Alturki, U., & Aljeraiwi, A. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology Malaysia (MY)
  • King Saud University (SA)
  • King Faisal University (SA)
  • Taif University (SA)
ORCID
Venue
IEEE Access
Publisher
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Published
2019
Volume
7
Pages
26797-26809
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/access.2019.2899368
OpenAlex
W2916191333
Cited by
435
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 81 · 2023: 79 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 12
FWCI
53.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplorehelp/downloads/license-information/OAPA.html (vor)
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (PY/2018/02903: Q.J130000.21A2.04E40)
  • Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University (RGP-1435-003)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
technology acceptance model, diffusion of innovation theory, e-learning systems, behavioral intention, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, relative advantage, trialability, perceived compatibility, complexity, perceived enjoyment, university students, technology adoption

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