The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Proposing a framework to assess Internet usage in university education: an empirical investigation from a student's perspective
Abstract
University administrators are continuously investing in Information Technology (IT) to support learning and help deal with educational budget cuts. Instructors are increasingly making their teaching materials available on the Internet. While administrators and instructors would like to make the Internet an effective educational tool, they need to understand what their students’ attitudes towards using it are. Since the use of the Internet in university education is still in its early stages, many issues regarding its use have not been fully addressed. This study was conducted to provide a better understanding of how the Internet is used in university learning from a student's perspective. Our research framework is based on the Theory of Reasoned Action, Technology Acceptance Model, and IT Diffusion Process Model. We use a survey conducted among university students to explore these issues. Research findings provide some useful insights for university administrators and educators.
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
The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact.
Adair, J. G. (1984) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.2.334 · Cited by 1,095 · cited 1×
“First, some level of ‘Hawthorne effect’ (eg, Adair, 1984; Franke, 1980; Jones, 1990; Schlaifer, 1980) may have existed because the survey measured students’ perceptions and attitudes.”
BackgroundThe Influence of Individual Differences on Skill in End-User Computing
Harrison, A. W., & Rainer, R. K. (1992) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1992.11517949 · Cited by 498
Cited by
Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers
Teo, T. (2009) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006 · Cited by 1,009
Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review
Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Charters, S., & Budgen, D. (2010) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2009.11.005 · Cited by 851
Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2011) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.03.002 · Cited by 531
Determining factors of the use of e-learning environments by university teachers
Mahdizadeh, H., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.004 · Cited by 273
The Technology Acceptance Model: Predicting Nurses' Intention to Use Telemedicine Technology (eICU)
KOWITLAWAKUL, Y. (2011) · CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing · doi:10.1097/ncn.0b013e3181f9dd4a · Cited by 272
Metadata
- Authors
- Cheung, W., & Huang, W.
- Venue
- British Journal of Educational Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-02-25
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 237-253
- ISSN
- 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8535
- OpenAlex
- W2108796211
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 21.97
- 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: Proposing a framework to assess Internet usage in university education: an empirical investigation from a student's perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00455.x
- The paper
- Cheung, W., & Huang, W. (2005). Proposing a framework to assess Internet usage in university education: an empirical investigation from a student's perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00455.x
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.