Cited by 50Online and Blended LearningTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies

How do facilitating conditions influence student-to-student interaction within an online learning platform? A new typology of the serial mediation model

Open access
Wut, Tai Ming, Lee, Stephanie Wing, Xu, Jing (Bill)·2022·Education Sciences

Abstract

This study investigates factors affecting university student-to-student interaction within online learning platforms. A new model was proposed based on the United Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). The single-stage cluster-sampling method was employed, and 113 university students in Hong Kong were respondents. It was found that Information Quality, Social Influence, and Facilitating Conditions affect students’ intention to interact with each other. A quasi-full mediation model was established of the mechanism from Facilitating Conditions to students’ interaction behavior. The direct effect of Facilitating Conditions on students’ interaction and the effect of System Quality on the intention of student interaction were not significant. A fast network, computing facilities, and mobile-friendly software are possible candidates of the virtual environment conditions affecting the intention of student-interaction behavior within online learning platforms.

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 · 10.3390/educsci12050337

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Accessible devices, stable network conditions, appropriate usage environments, and timely technical support may reduce perceived barriers and improve students' confidence in using the system.

    “In the context of AR-assisted CBT, accessible devices, stable network conditions, appropriate usage environments, and timely technical support may reduce perceived barriers and improve students’ confidence in using the system [101,102].”

    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 [101]

    The Discussion links fast Wi-Fi, computing facilities, and mobile-friendly software to students’ intention to interact on an online platform; the facilitating-conditions measures also include someone available to help with platform difficulties. The paper does not establish that these conditions reduce perceived barriers or improve confidence, and it studies online student interaction rather than AR-assisted CBT. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Wut, T.M.; Neil, I. Factors Affecting Business Students Using Online Electronic Platform as Their Places for Academic Discussion. In Proceedings of the AIB Southeast Asia Regional Conference, Penang, Malaysia, 3-5 December 2015.
  2. Nichols, M. A theory of E-learning. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2003, 6, 1-10.
  3. Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling, 3rd ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2022.
  4. Mills, G.; Gay, L.R. Educational Research, 11th ed.; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2016.
  5. Hair, J.; Anderson, R.; Babin, B.; Black, W. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010.
  6. Newby, P. Research Methods for Education, 2nd ed.; Routledge: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014.
  7. Johnson, B.; Christensen, L. Educational Research, 3rd ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wut, T. M., Lee, S. W., & Xu, J. (.
Affiliations
Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
Corresponding author
Wut, Tai Ming
Venue
Education Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-05-11
Volume
12
Issue
5
Pages
337
ISSN
2227-7102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4280558363
Cited by
50
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4
FWCI
22.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Education Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
Keywords
student-student interaction, online learning platforms, facilitating conditions, UTAUT, information quality, social influence, system quality, serial mediation, virtual learning environments, computer facilities

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