The DOI matches its Crossref record; 90 of the 93 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Technology Acceptance, Technological Self-Efficacy, and Attitude Toward Technology-Based Self-Directed Learning: Learning Motivation as a Mediator
Open accessAbstract
This study explored the contribution of technology acceptance and technological self-efficacy to attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning in a sample of Chinese undergraduate students. The study also inquired into whether learning motivation mediated these associations. A total of 332 undergraduate students of college English course were enrolled to participate in questionnaires regarding their technology acceptance, technological self-efficacy, attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning, and learning motivation. Results indicated that students' technology acceptance and technological self-efficacy were related to their attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning. The findings also indicated that learning motivation mediated the relations of technology acceptance, technological self-efficacy, and attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning. Specifically, students experiencing greater technology acceptance and technological self-efficacy showed higher attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning. This study highlighted the significance of learning motivation as a mediating mechanism illustrating relations between students' perception of technology environments and their attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning.
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“SE was widely acknowledged as an essential predictor of students’ technology acceptance because it influences cognitive processing, emotional stability, and perceived ability to manage new technologies [58,59].”
From Advancing Undergraduate Student Mental Healthcare of Social Anxiety Disorder: Evaluating the Acceptance of AR-Assisted Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Through TAM-Based Constructs. (2026) · cites this paper as [59]
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.
Citations
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788 · cited 1×
“Hu and Bentler (1999) suggested that TLI and CFI should be greater than or equal to 0.90 to indicate good suitability, and RMSEA and SRMR should be less than 0.06 and 0.08, respectively.”
BackgroundInfluentialTabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
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 · cited 3×
“The TAM was first proposed by Davis (1989) on the basis of the theory of reasoned action (TRA) advanced by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), which is used to explain the associations between the students’ technology acceptance of computer system, behavioral intention, and definite behavior of technology…”
BackgroundMethodUser 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 · cited 2×
“Venkatesh et al. (2003) expanded the TAM with empirical research by adding such factors as social influence, cognitive structure, and experience and the factor of subjective norm that had not been adopted in the original TAM.”
Background(2013) · Cited by 44,563
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941 · cited 1×
“In this study, structural equation modeling was used, and a two-stage approach to data analysis was adopted (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988).”
Method(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01 · Cited by 34,210 · cited 2×
“According to Deci and Ryan (2000), intrinsic motivation helps to construct students’ experience of pleasure, enjoyment, and satisfaction, which in turn would further motivate their learning engagement (Dysvik and Kuvaas, 2013).”
BackgroundUser Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709 · cited 13×
“According to Teo et al. (2015, p.78), “attitude toward technology use has been examined in various models that attempt to explain individuals’ intention for technology use, including Technology Acceptance Model (TAM; Davis et al., 1989), TAM2 (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000), and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Tec…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-efficacy: the exercise of control
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-1826 · Cited by 24,451
Flagged first, then by citations
3 of the 93 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Bandura, 1986, Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
- Carmines, 1981, Analyzing models with unobserved variables: analysis of covariance structures, 65
- Elliot, 2017, Achievement goals, 43
- Knowles, 1975, Self-directed learning: A guide for leaners and teachers.
- Knowles, 2015, The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (Vol. 8).
- Kop, 2011, New dimension of self-directed learning in an open-networked learning environment, International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 7, 1
- Oxford, 2009, The influence of technology on second language writing, 9
- Schunk, 2009, Self-efficacy theory, 35
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–329 of 329
Yue, J., Kim, K. O., & Yeo, Y. H. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1830991
“By contrast, digital self-efficacy refers to individuals’ perceived ability to learn, operate, and master digital devices, thereby influencing effort, persistence, and coping strategies when they encounter digital tasks (Bandura, 1997; Pan, 2020; Rohde et al., 2024).”
Lee, Y., Kwok, O., & Wu, J. (2026) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2026.2676675
Hussain, M., Ahmad, U., Luong, N. T., Rauf, A., & Ghouri, A. M. (2026) · Discover Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s43621-026-03776-8
“The prior literature provides ample evidence that technological self-efficacy is a significant predictor of technology adoption, digital innovation behavior, and performance outcomes [17, 18, 46].”
Perceptions and Attitudes of Nursing Students’ Transition to Remote Instruction During Covid-19
Manning, K. Q., Wang, C.-H., Lambert, A., Jones, M. C., Chidume, T. L., Dong, J., Curtis, A. M., & Brown, L. G. (2025) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/979-8-88730-897-520251015
Uso de Agentes Conversacionales en la Mejora del Bienestar de las Personas Mayores
Dragut, A., Lacuesta, R., & Romero, J. G. (2024) · Revista de la Asociación Interacción Persona Ordenador (AIPO) · doi:10.65234/interaccion.119
Alan, F. A. O. (2026) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-9414-6_17
Higher Education Digital Immigrant Mathematics Teachers: Refugees of Now Normal Education
Valera, N. B., & Zales, J. P. (2026) · Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation/Advances in science, technology & innovation · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-21822-3_39
Xiao, Y., Hou, Q., Li, S., Sun, S., Miao, Q., Zhang, Y., & Liu, B. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16081376
“Technological self-efficacy is a key construct associated with whether students believe they can use technology to learn and achieve expected learning outcomes (X. Pan, 2020).”
Yang, X., & Huang, Y. (2026) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/jeim-11-2025-1156
Alkubati, S. A., Almagharbeh, W. T., Alqalah, T. A. H., Salameh, B. S., Albaqawi, H., Alrasheeday, A., Alharbi, A., Alshammari, L. S., Alshammari, B., Pasay-an, E. A., et al. (2026) · JMIR Nursing · doi:10.2196/92533
“It has been noted that self-efficacy is an important variable that affects the use of any technology, suggesting that students with such self-efficacy will be able to break through barriers and embrace new technology optimization [41].”
Chai, H., Zhang, B., Xue, R., Xiao, S., & Wang, Q. (2026) · Journal of Teaching in Physical Education · doi:10.1123/jtpe.2025-0523
Mosia, M. S., Nannim, F. A., Thamae, M. T., Hamilton, J., & Egara, F. O. (2026) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.103441
Chen, K., Lonbar, A. G., Arthur, S., & Wen, Y. (2026) · ASCE Construction Research Congress (CRC) · doi:10.1061/9780784486979.090
Ravi, J. V. P., Palau‐Saumell, R., & Meyer, J. (2026) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2026.2719730
Valle, M. N. D., Łaba, K., & Mayer, C. (2026) · SA Journal of Industrial Psychology · doi:10.4102/sajip.v52i0.2342
Alvarado, W. M., Villacrés-Roca, R., & Pérez-Cepeda, M. (2026) · Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s41347-026-00704-5
Factors Influencing Wearable Technology Adoption
Chang, C.-C., & Chen, S. (2026) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730.2026.2726427
Can Artificial Intelligence-Based Counseling Improve Iranian Students' Spiritual Well-Being?
Jafari, A., & Jadidi, A. (2026) · Journal of Religion and Health · doi:10.1007/s10943-026-02765-5
“Prior research has shown that such (Pan, 2020; Rayung & Ambotang, 2018).”
Monge-Rogel, R., Durán-González, G., Panes-Martínez, M., Cáceres-Chomalí, R., & Rojas-Cabello, J. (2026) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.103648
Liao, Z., Zhou, X., Dai, D., & Ni, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1931835
“For example, in technology-enhanced learning contexts, technology self-efficacy and learning motivation/attitude jointly influence technology acceptance and continued use, thereby influencing learning engagement (Pan, 2020; Rosli and Saleh, 2023).”
Man, S. S., Su, P., So, B. C. L., & Ng, S. S. M. (2026) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2026.2738046
Shao, C. (2026) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2026.2738586
ShayesteFar, P., Shadigoo, S., Fazlali, F., & Shamohammad, T. (2026) · Technology, Pedagogy and Education · doi:10.1080/1475939x.2026.2730526
Zhou, W., MANANSALA, L., Valerio, A., & Sun, X. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0359308
Thoumrungroje, A., & Suprawan, L. (2026) · Journal of Social Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsocm-11-2025-0345
Haruna, H. H., Tajuddin, A. J. A., Hassan, I., Naeem, M., Jbara, Y. H. F., Hasrat, I. R., Elzaghmouri, B. M., Albahar, M. A., & Ikram, A. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10889622/v1
Boucetta, N., N'djoli, J., Bellazaar, R., Kassbi, A., Seghir, H., & Bidari, A. (2026) · Journal of Comprehensive Nursing Research and Care · doi:10.33790/jcnrc1100234
Montero-Izquierdo, A. I., Jeong, J. S., & González‐Gómez, D. (2026) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440261490803
Metadata
- Authors
- Pan, X.
- Affiliations
- Zhejiang Normal University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Pan, Xiaoquan
- ORCID
- Pan, Xiaoquan
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2020-10-27
- Volume
- 11
- Pages
- 564294-564294
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7653185
- OpenAlex
- W3097042973
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 93
- Citations by year
- 2026: 67 · 2025: 99 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 6
- FWCI
- 21.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Keywords
- technology acceptance, technology self-efficacy, student motivation, mediation, self-directed learning, undergraduate students, college English, Chinese students
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
