sustainability
Article
The Integration of the Technology Acceptance Model and
Value-Based Adoption Model to Study the Adoption of
E-Learning: The Moderating Role of e-WOM
Ying-Kai Liao 1 , Wann-Yih Wu 2 , Trang Quang Le 2,3, *






Citation: Liao, Y.-K.; Wu, W.-Y.; Le,
T.Q.; Phung, T.T.T. The Integration of
the Technology Acceptance Model
and Value-Based Adoption Model to
Study the Adoption of E-Learning:
The Moderating Role of e-WOM.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815. https://
doi.org/10.3390/su14020815
Academic Editor: Hyunchul Ahn
Received: 20 December 2021
Accepted: 9 January 2022
Published: 12 January 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020815
and Thuy Thi Thu Phung 3
1 Program of International Business, Nanhua University, Chiayi County 62249, Taiwan;
yksuper889@nhu.edu.tw
2 Department of Business Administration, Nanhua University, Chiayi County 62249, Taiwan;
wanyi@nhu.edu.tw
3 Faculty of Sport Science, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam;
phungthithuthuy@tdtu.edu.vn
* Correspondence: lequangtrang@tdtu.edu.vn
Abstract: The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has lately been utilized in a number of studies
to investigate why people reject or adopt new technologies like mobile commerce or e-learning.
However, several studies have found weaknesses in TAM’s ability to predict consumers’ purchase
intention behavior. To compensate for TAM’s weaknesses, this study presents a model that integrates
all of TAM’s components with the Value-Based Adoption Model (VAM). The perceived benefits and
sacrifices were considered to provide a list of the implications for both researchers and e-learning
service providers. Furthermore, the moderating role of e-word of mouth was utilized to examine
the relationship between attitude, intention, perceived value, and intention toward e-learning, in
order to match the current circumstances with the growing popularity of social networks. This
study was conducted with a quantitative analysis by using data collected from survey 417 e-learning
consumers. Except for perceived fee, which has a negative effect on perceived value, the results
demonstrate that all hypotheses of latent correlations in TAM and VAM were strongly significant.
Furthermore, attitude and perceived value have a significant role in determining consumer adoption
of e-learning. Consumers’ perceived value will be driven by the high and low levels of the moderating
influence of e-word of mouth, influencing their intention toward e-learning. Since e-learning is an
effective sustainable education system, the result of this study can provide a good solution to facilitate
e-learning in current and future conditions.
Keywords: e-learning; technology acceptance model; value-based adoption model; e-word of mouth;
perceived value
1. Introduction
E-learning is a virtual learning method using information communication technologies
(ICT) such as a computer, cell phone, or tablet. E-learning has been shown to have many
advantages over traditional learning, including making it possible for users to study
anytime, anywhere, at a low cost. Recently, the important role of e-learning has been
demonstrated through the COVID-19 pandemic [1]. It offers a unique approach that
can replace traditional learning and minimize direct interaction between teachers, and
students. Numerous studies have been conducted to determine the factors which influence
consumers’ adoption of e-learning technologies using TAM to provide universities and
educational institutions with a way to help users accept e-learning [2–4]. TAM is the most
extensively utilized theoretical framework model for assessing new technology adoption.
Especially in the context of adopting e-learning, many extensions of TAM have been
developed to better suit the current context. [5] examined 107 previous studies before
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 2 of 16

proposing a general extended TAM for e-learning. However, other studies have argued
that TAM is only suitable for individual use and acceptance, not for organizations and
companies [6]. According to [7], in the current context, TAM still has many flaws because it
does not take into account how social, individual, and cultural factors affect consumers’
acceptance of technology. Furthermore, previous studies have applied extended-TAM to
evaluate consumers’ attitude toward e-learning (ATE) [8,9], which attempted but failed to
demonstrate that perceived ease of use (PEU) has a significant influence on consumers’ ATE.
Furthermore, the meta-analysis research by [10] confirmed that PEU is the weakest factor
in determining both the intention toward e-learning (IE) and the actual usage. Recently, the
study of [11] presented TAM combined with Innovation Diffusion Theory to investigate
students’ IE by adding initial factors acting on two extrinsic motivating factors, perceived
usefulness (PU) and PEU, to complement the efforts of previous studies. The results
of their study showed that PU and PEU positively affect IE and it also indicated that
intrinsic motivation affects certain factors, such as perceived enjoyment (PE), which are
often ignored or receive limited attention by researchers. Therefore, most studies focus on
the TAM extension and external factors, ignoring perceived value (PV). Especially in the
current context, when information is received quickly and easily through social networks,
consumers can easily raise awareness about the value of adopting new technology. They
can also consider new technology for themselves by accepting the fee and risks that are
worth what they get in return.
This study considers the adoption of e-learning from not only a technology accep-
tance perspective but also a value perspective. It incorporates TAM [12], which has been
used when testing consumers’ adoption behavior in new technology and the Value-Based
Adoption Model (VAM) [13], which was developed to predict new technology adoption by
using extrinsic factors, intrinsic factors, effort, and monetary and non-monetary factors. In
addition, this study proposes to test the effect of e-word of mouth (eWOM) as a moderator
on the relationship between ATE and IE, and the link between PV and IE as well. We replace
the social influence variable often proposed by previous studies to better suit the context
of social networks. Moreover, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a sustainable learning
system is extremely needed for students and users [14], has pointed out that e-learning
helps to resolve the problems we have faced in the pandemic, such as limited risk potential
of direct interaction between instructors and users as well as social distancing policies. The
findings of [15,16] demonstrate how an e-learning system can enhance students’ and users’
perception of sustainability learning in the COVID-19 crisis.
The research’s objectives are as follows: (a) to develop and evaluate an integration
model of TAM and the VAM on consumers’ adoption of new technologies; (b) to explore
the influence of each component of the perceived benefits and sacrifices on PV; (c) to
compare the level impact between attitude and PV to find out the key factors that influence
consumers’ intention toward new technologies; (d) to determine the moderating effects of
eWOM on the relationship between ATE and PV in terms of the IE.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

2.1. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
Reference [12] developed the TAM model in predicting consumers’ attitudes toward
new technology. PU and PEOU are the model’s core constructs for determining consumer
attitudes toward new technologies. In the research subject of information technology,
TAM has been thoroughly studied and recognized. Therefore, TAM is a powerful model
widely used in assessing the consumer acceptability of new technology services in ITC [17].
However, given the current situation, the variables in TAM have become simple and have
a limited ability to predict a customer’s psychology during decision-making in a practical
context [18]. TAM has been extended many times to apply to different technologies. In the
current context, e-learning is a topic that attracts a large number of researchers interested in
the use of various new technologies. Reference [19] conducted a systematic review of the use
of artificial intelligence (AI) in online education. Additionally, reference [20] emphasized
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 3 of 16

the necessity of using AI in e-learning to better user experience and personalize learning
material recommendations in order to increase learning efficiency and sustainable learning
environments. Among them, TAM is still the most frequently used to predict adoption
intentions for a variety of technologies, particularly in the application of technology to
support learning performance. Reference [21] utilized an extended TAM to assess teachers’
intentions to incorporate augmented reality and virtual reality technologies into their
classroom teaching. Additionally, reference [22] used the TAM-3 model to determine
the desire of participants in e-learning to use cloud storage. On the topic of IE, Table 1
summarized some of the research that used the TAM model. The proposed variables in their
extended TAM research model mainly focus on: subjective norms, PE, self-efficacy, and
some quality-related factors such as service quality and content quality. The study results
show that applying TAM to the research model in the field of e-learning is completely
appropriate. This study proposes an extended TAM model by combining it with VAM to
emphasize the role of PV in research into new technology applications.

Table 1. Previous studies review.

Context and Extension

Study Factors Results and Findings
Model

SE, SN, PE, PEU, PU, IN,
[23]
computer anxiety, experience,
e-learning, General
Extended TAM
• SN positively affects PU
• Experience, PE positively affects PEU, PU
• Computer anxiety negatively affects PEU and
PU
• SE positively affects PEU
• PU and PEU positively affects IN

• User’s greater IN invest more time using

e-learning, theory of
AT, perceived behavioral planned behavior with
[24]
control, SN, IN social identity and social
bonds.
e-learning technologies.
• AT positively impacts IN.
• Perceived behavioral control positively impacts
IN.
• SN positively impacts IN.

• PEU positively impacts PU

e-learning, TAM, and • PEU positively impacts AT.
[25] PEU, PU, AT, IN • PU positively impacts AT and IN.
Elearning User Interface
• AT positively impacts IN.

• Educational quality, SEQ, SQ, and IQ positively

Educational quality, SEQ, SQ,
[26]
IQ, PEU, PU, satisfaction, IN
e-learning, TAM, and affect satisfaction.
• PEU positively affects PU
Information Systems
• SEQ, IQ, SQ, satisfaction, and PU positively
success model
affect IN

Cloud e-learning • SE and PE positively affect IN to use Cloud

[27] SE, PE, PEU, PU, IN application, TAM, and e-learning applications.
usability factors.

e-learning in the • IQ positively impacts PU

IQ, SQ, PEU, PU, user COVID-19 pandemic. • SQ and user interface affect PEU.
[28] • PEU positively affects PU.
interface, IN E-TAM and Information
Systems success model • PEU and PU directly affect IN.

Note: SE = self-efficacy; SN = subjective norm; AT = attitude; IN = intention; IQ = Information quality;

SEQ = service quality; SQ = system quality.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 4 of 16

2.2. Value-Based Adoption Model (VAM)

According to [13], adoption intention can be predicted through PV. PV was defined
based on a balance of benefits and sacrifices and the classification of motivations into
extrinsic and intrinsic subsystems. Consumers gain benefits that are not just useful but
also thrilling and enjoyable. Sacrifices, which include both monetary and non-monetary
aspects, are the prices users incur while utilizing new technology. These costs include
money, time, and the intangible costs associated with attempting and implementing new
technology. The VAM was designed in response to the limitations of TAM, considering
factors affecting PV. PV is beyond the point of maximum value. More specifically, TAM was
proposed based on PU and PEU variables to explain and predict customer intent, while
the VAM is based on perceived benefits and sacrifices. This includes both positive, and
negative influences to bypass the limitations of TAM. Customers can assess the value they
receive, resulting in a more accurate intention to use new technology [29]. The VAM model
has been merged with other models and applied in a range of studies based on consumer
value perspectives. Reference [29] proposed TAM and VAM be integrated into applications
of Internet of Things (IoT) smart home services; [30] devised the Acceptance and Use of
Technology (UTAUT) and the VAM in the context of AI research; and [31] developed an
integration model of VAM and transaction cost theories. Considering that, this research
Sustainability 2022, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 17
proposes a combination of TAM and the VAM to support each other. The illustration of the
research framework for this study is shown in Figure 1.

Figure
Figure 1. Conceptual 1. Conceptual
proposed model.proposed model.

2.3. Relationships3.among Variables in TAM

Methodologies
Many prior3.1.
studies applied TAM to investigate which factors affect e-learning orien-
Data Collection
tation. These studiesThe have
dataproven that
collection PUconducted
was and PEUatare Tontwo
Duccritical variables for
Thang University, under-
Vietnam from Au-
standing customer
gustbehavior in the
to November application
2019. of new targeted
The respondents technologies. PU is the customer’s
are undergraduate students, masters
perception of how using the
students, andtechnology willas
Ph.D. students help them
well. Theyimprove and gain
had to meet more benefits
the following [11].
criteria. First, they
Besides that, PEU
hadis to
defined
have atasleast
“the4 degree
monthsto ofwhich a usersinfeel
involvement that utilizing
an e-learning a e-learning
service provided by Ton
Duc Thang University;
system will be uncomplicated”. because
Rather thanallspending
students are required
time to complete
learning how toatutilize
least 4 the
h per week
in a semester of self-learning at the library via an e-learning system,
system, users can begin using it immediately, reaping the benefits of learning such as time,most of the exercises
money, and effort savings. This enhances their PU in association with the e-learning system; to get
and learning materials were uploaded into the system. Therefore, each student had
used to and have good experiences with e-learning. Second, they had to have completed
at least one paid online course offered by another institution. The author designed an
online questionnaire using Google Forms and sent it directly to target respondents. In
order to keep the sample from being duplicated, the target respondents had to log into
their university student email account to finish the questionnaire. A total of 417 valid sam-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 5 of 16

the more user-friendly the system, the greater the PU [32]. Additionally, the positive effects
of PEU on PU have been demonstrated in e-learning systems [33]. According to [34] attitude
is defined as a psychological emotion that is channeled through consumers’ assessments
of the innovation. When consumers’ perceptions of these two constructs improve, their
ATE is more aggressive. This could also boost a user’s receptivity to an e-learning system.
In the context of e-learning, both PEU and PU have been proven to have a considerable
positive effect on ATE [35,36]. In TAM, intention is essential in determining how new
technology is actually used [11]. PU and PEU also have a key role in customer ATE. Besides,
consumers’ views that adopting an e-learning system will result in positive results for their
learning performance, and the positive influences of PU and PEU drive IE in this study [37].
Additionally, the influence of ATE on IE has been confirmed [38]. Therefore, the following
hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 1 (H1). Perceived ease of use positively impacts perceived usefulness.

Hypothesis 2 (H2). Perceived ease of use positively impacts attitude towards e-learning.

Hypothesis 3 (H3). Perceived usefulness positively impacts attitude towards e-learning.

Hypothesis 4 (H4). Attitude towards e-learning positively impacts intention toward e-learning.

Hypothesis 5 (H5). Perceived usefulness positively impacts intention toward e-learning.

2.4. Perceived Benefits and Perceived Sacrifice in VAM

2.4.1. Perceived Benefits
Reference [13] proposed VAM with two antecedent factors: perceived benefits and
perceived sacrifices to assess PV. Accordingly, in this study, we defined perceived benefits
including PU and PE. In the e-learning context, the degree to which users feel that learning
through an e-learning system will be able to enhance their knowledge and help them accom-
plish the goal was described as PU. For this reason, consumers may consider the benefits of
using e-learning to be greater than what they have to pay. Reference [39] found that PU has
been considered an important determinant of PV. Some recent research [40–42] has found
that the relation of PU to PV is fully significant. We therefore propose this hypothesis:

Hypothesis 6 (H6). Perceived usefulness positively impacts perceived value.

Many researchers have suggested that when a user experiences more enjoyment using
an IT system, he/she has increasingly intense motivations to interact with IT [43]. In this
research, PE is referred as to the consumer’s self-consciousness of fun, pleasure, and delight
when participating and interacting in an e-learning system. Besides, while PU plays an
important role in the utilitarian dimension of PV, PE is an essential dimension in e-learning
users’ perception of hedonic PV [44]. E-learning systems should be designed to provide a
pleasant learning experience, an interesting method of learning, and appealing technology
because consumers do not want to use a system that causes them stress or fatigue [45].
According to [46–48], PE has a significant positive impact on PV. Therefore, the hypothesis
has been presented:

Hypothesis 7 (H7). Perceived enjoyment positively impacts perceived value.

2.4.2. Perceived Sacrifice

The intention of the behavior of consumers through new technology services is in-
fluenced by the value they received from the service, which is a perceived fee (PF) [49].
If the value they get from e-learning is higher than the costs they spend, then purchase
intent will be formed. If the value is lower, they will refuse the service. In the context of
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 6 of 16

e-learning, service providers have to take care of the balance between expenses and the
value that consumers receive. The costs include not only money but also other factors such
as time and effort [13,50]. According to [43,51] the degree of PF has a considerable negative
impact on customers’ PV. Thus, the hypothesis was given:

Hypothesis 8 (H8). Perceived fee has a negative influence on perceived value.

Additionally, the financial costs and the popular opinion of using a technological
service like e-learning limits the spread of new technology [52]. The financial risks include
the original purchase price and maintenance costs [53]. When consumers make purchase
decisions, they are generally concerned about the product’s efficiency and the financial
consequences of the purchase, especially with new technologies such as e-learning [47].
This concern includes the perceived risk (PR) [48,54]. PR often arises from system hackers
targeting the poor security of the system in order to steal consumer information such as
personal information, credit card details, etc. These risks have a strong negative impact on
consumer IE. This is a problem service providers should prioritize [47,48]. Thus, the PR of
adopting e-learning will affect PV. Therefore, we can hypothesize:

Hypothesis 9 (H9). Perceived risk has a negative impact on perceived value.

2.5. Perceived Value on Intention toward E-Learning

The possibility of a consumer purchasing a specific product in the future is measured
by purchase intention [55]. Similarly, when consumers sense the worth of a product or
brand, they are more likely to acquire it [47]. Consumers attempt to achieve the maximum
benefit. PV is reflected by comparing benefits and sacrifices and forming an intent based on
those comparisons. Moreover, consumers can shift their attitudes and emotions from the
benefits of the product and create PV. Thus, if consumers can receive trustworthy PV when
they purchase e-learning services, the services will bring many benefits for an e-learning
institution such as creating a good brand image, the loyalty of consumers, profit, and
competitiveness. In the e-learning context, PV is proportional to the intention. The higher
the value, the greater the intent [56,57]. Research has indicated that PV has a strongly
significant influence on IE [58,59]. Therefore, we can hypothesize:

Hypothesis 10 (H10). Perceived value positively impacts intention toward e-learning.

2.6. The Moderating Role of eWOM

Reference [60] have defined eWOM as the positive or negative reviews, and comments
of potential users or actual users about a product or a company via social networks or
online tools. Recently, with the rapid growth of social networks, consumers have had
the tendency to look for information and suggestions from others. They initially find
information from those who are in close relation to them such as family members, friends,
and colleagues [61], then, they search for information more widely. Usually, they search for
information from those who influence them or internet influencers. The research of [62]
pointed out that consumers rely more upon user-generated eWOM than firm-generated
communications. Moreover, in social media channels, both the quality and quantity of
eWOM impact consumers’ purchase decisions [63]. Thus, this study only considered
user-generated positive eWOM to explore the moderator role of eWOM. Previous studies
had shown the positive influence of eWOM on IE [64–66], and positive eWOM will shape
consumer ATE [67]. Furthermore, the study of [68] indicated that eWOM has a strong
relationship with PV. According to [69], when customers have a favorable attitude toward
online lecture websites, they are willing to recommend the e-learning course to others
in their social networks. According to [70] students’ e-learning directly impacts eWOM.
This proves that when the strong ties of eWOM give a high recommendation about an
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 7 of 16

e-learning system or e-learning service the overall value will increase value perception
among consumers. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 11 (H11). eWOM positively moderates the relationship between attitude and intention,
such that attitude toward e-learning influences the intention toward e-learning more strongly when
eWOM is higher.

Hypothesis 12 (H12). eWOM positively moderates the relationship between perceived value and
intention, such that perceived value influences the intention toward e-learning more strongly when
eWOM is higher.

3. Methodologies
3.1. Data Collection
The data collection was conducted at Ton Duc Thang University, Vietnam from August
to November 2019. The respondents targeted are undergraduate students, masters students,
and Ph.D. students as well. They had to meet the following criteria. First, they had to
have at least 4 months of involvement in an e-learning service provided by Ton Duc
Thang University; because all students are required to complete at least 4 h per week in
a semester of self-learning at the library via an e-learning system, most of the exercises
and learning materials were uploaded into the system. Therefore, each student had to get
used to and have good experiences with e-learning. Second, they had to have completed at
least one paid online course offered by another institution. The author designed an online
questionnaire using Google Forms and sent it directly to target respondents. In order to keep
the sample from being duplicated, the target respondents had to log into their university
student email account to finish the questionnaire. A total of 417 valid samples were
returned. Specifically, there were 417 respondents—236 males and 181 females—and most
of them are bachelor students with an average age of 18 to 25 years old. 198 respondents
(47.5%) had at least one year of experience in e-learning. The demographic profile of the
respondents is detailed in Table 2.
Table 2. Respondents’ characteristics.

Respondents
Classification
Frequency Percentage (%)
Gender
Male 236 56.6%
Female 181 43.4%
Age
18–25 years old 316 75.8%
25–35 years old 88 21.1%
Above 35 years old 13 3.1%
Education
Bachelor 318 77%
Master 88 21.3%
Doctoral 7 1.7%
Income
300–500$ 347 83.2%
500–1000$ 62 14.9%
Higher than 1000$ 8 1.9%
E-learning experience
3–6 months 93 23.3%
7–12 months 126 30.2%
Higher than 1 year 198 47.5%
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 8 of 16

3.2. Research Instrument

Nine latent constructs comprised of 35 items were developed based on previous
research literature. The author adopted five items of PU, five items of PEU, four items of
ATE, and four items of IE from [12]. Three items of PE were adopted by [71]. Three items
of PR were gleaned from [34]. PF with three items were picked from [72]. Four items for
PV were adopted from [13]. Four items of eWOM were based on [73,74]. Measurement
for each item was done using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to
5 = strongly agree.

3.3. Analytical Methods

The authors used partial least squares (PLS) and the Smart-PLS software version 3.0
application to analyze the data [75]. PLS-SEM is a technique that is well suited for pre-
dictive model research as well as exploratory studies. Its advantage is that it is capable
of processing models with multiple independent and dependent variables as well as vari-
ables with multicollinearity. The bootstrapping algorithm was used to evaluate the path
significance of the hypothesized model on a total of 5000 re-samples and 417 cases, as
recommended by [76].
In addition, this study examined the common method bias using Harman’s single
factor test [77]. The data indicated that a single factor extracted 43.96 percent of the total
variance, well below the 50% threshold. Thus, it was established that there is no risk of
methodological bias in this investigation.

4. Data Analysis and Results

4.1. Measurement Model
Table 3 shows the result of the assessment of the construct reliability and validity of
the model by following the criteria of [76]. Factor loadings (0.739–0.940) were greater than
the recommended value of 0.7 [78]. Furthermore, the CR of each structure (0.784–0.954)
was greater than 0.7. This proved that the scale has good internal consistency reliability.
To reach a convergent validity, the AVE must be greater than 0.5 [78,79]. Therefore, these
findings show the AVE (0.643–0.833) met the required criteria.
Table 3. Reliability measures for the measurement model.

Variables/Items Factor Loading CR AVE VIF R2

Attitude toward e-learning (α = 0.917) 0.941 0.800 0.601
ATE1: I believe it would be prudent to use e-learning
for the purpose of improving my learning 0.890 3.470
performance.
ATE2: Studying via e-learning is a prudent choice 0.905 3.757
ATE3: I am an advocate of e-learning. 0.892 3.055
ATE4: I’m interested in taking courses that
0.889 2.949
incorporate e-learning.
Intention toward e-learning (α = 0.933) 0.952 0.833 0.600
IE1: In general, I intend to make future use of
0.924 4.207
e-learning.
IE2: If the opportunity presents itself, I intend to
0.900 3.289
utilize e-learning in the future.
IE3: I anticipate utilizing e-learning in the future. 0.913 3.481
IE4: I intend to use e-learning in the future to
0.914 3.865
supplement my knowledge.
Perceived enjoyment (α = 0.900) 0.938 0.833 N/A
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 9 of 16

Table 3. Cont.

Variables/Items Factor Loading CR AVE VIF R2

PE1: I have fun interacting with E-learning 0.918 3.183
PE2: Using E-learning provides me with a lot of
0.940 3.846
enjoyment
PE3: I enjoy using E-learning 0.880 2.328
Perceived ease of use (α = 0.940) 0.954 0.807 N/A
PEU1: I have no difficulties comprehending how to
0.902 3.474
use the e-learning system
PEU2: I have no trouble getting the e-learning system
0.882 3.078
to perform what I want
PEU3: My interaction with the e-learning system is
0.899 3.465
easy and straightforward
PEU4: Learning how to use the e-learning system is
0.904 3.758
simple for me
PEU5: I find the e-learning system to be very
0.904 3.595
user-friendly
Perceived fee (α = 0.844) 0.899 0.749 N/A
PF1: The fee for using e-learning is excessive 0.872 2.160
PF2: The fee for using e-learning is reasonable 0.922 1.955
PF3: I am satisfied with the cost of using e-learning 0.798 1.965
Perceived risk (α = 0.790) 0.874 0.700 N/A
PR1: I feel unsafe when using E-learning 0.835 1.909
PR2: I am worried that private information would be
0.923 2.033
leaked when using E-learning
PR3: I am worried about personal information
suffering from 0.743 1.426
unauthorized use when using E-learning
Perceived usefulness (α = 0.933) 0.884 0.949 0.790 2.962 0.612
PU1: By using the e-learning system, I will be able to
0.910 3.775
complete educational activities more quickly
PU2: By using the e-learning system, I will be able to
0.876 2.836
enhance my learning performance
PU3: Using an e-learning system simplifies the
0.870 2.811
process of learning course content
PU4: By using an e-learning system, I will be able to
0.903 3.640
maximize my learning productivity
PU5: By using the e-learning system, I will increase
my learning efficacy
Perceived value (α = 0.918) 0.942 0.803 0.638
PV1: Considering the fee, I believe that using
0.893 2.821
E-learning is a valuable idea.
PV2: E-learning is advantageous to me due to the
0.900 3.009
general amount of effort I need to put in
PV3: E-learning is worthwhile for me based on the
0.897 3.064
amount of time I need to spend
PV4: E-learning provides me with good value in
0.896 3.063
general
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 10 of 16

Table 3. Cont.

Variables/Items Factor Loading CR AVE VIF R2

e-word of mouth (α = 0.823) 0.878 0.643 N/A
e-WOM1: I have recommended my e-learning course
0.817 1.766
on social media to others without being asked.
e-WOM2: I offer favorable comments and information
about my e-learning experience on social media to 0.855 1.666
those who ask for my advice.
e-WOM3: I often persuade my contacts on social
networks about the benefits of e-learning can improve 0.739 1.775
their learning performance.
e-WOM4: When others people talked about the
benefits of e-learning on social media, I have made 0.792 1.782
positive comments.
Note: α = Cronbach’s α; CR = Composite reliabilities; AVE = average variance extracted; N/A = Not available.

Second, to evaluate the discriminant validity the author used both the Fornell–Larcker
criterion [80] and the heterotrait–monotrait ratio [81]. Table 4 shows the square root of
the AVE of each variable is higher than the other correlation values of other constructs.
Moreover, Table 4 shows that the highest value of HTMT is 0.841, lower than 0.9, in
line with the suggestion of [81]. Thus, all variables had discriminant validity. In sum,
the results indicate adequate model fit, good reliability, and sufficient convergent and
discriminant validity.
Table 4. The assessment of discriminant validity.

Construct Mean SD ATE IE PE PEU PF PR PU PV e-WOM

ATE 3.88 0.948 0.894 0.694 0.786 0.799 0.253 0.150 0.777 0.748 0.101
IE 3.90 0.886 0.643 0.913 0.740 0.766 0.165 0.214 0.719 0.761 0.221
PE 3.83 0.978 0.714 0.678 0.913 0.841 0.156 0.150 0.789 0.792 0.099
PEU 3.88 0.949 0.742 0.718 0.774 0.898 0.223 0.133 0.834 0.814 0.085
PF 4.20 0.693 0.222 0.166 0.152 0.215 0.865 0.091 0.194 0.177 0.103
PR 3.50 0.633 0.135 0.192 0.129 0.122 −0.067 0.837 0.124 0.213 0.206
PU 3.89 0.953 0.719 0.672 0.724 0.782 0.180 0.115 0.889 0.807 0.100
PV 3.73 0.882 0.688 0.706 0.720 0.758 0.173 0.194 0.749 0.896 0.079
e-WOM 3.50 0.732 −0.092 −0.211 −0.084 −0.080 0.045 −0.065 −0.096 −0.056 0.802
Note: The diagonal values represent the square roots of AVEs, above the diagonal are the values of HTMT values,
and below the diagonal are the correlation coefficients between the construct values.

Finally, the author conducted a multicollinearity evaluation before running the struc-
tural model analysis. According to [82], multicollinearity can occur if the tolerance is less
than 0.20 or if the coefficient of magnification variance (VIF) exceeds 5. Table 3 shows the
VIF ranging from a minimum value of 1.426 to a maximum value of 4.207. Given that
these values are lower than the threshold of 5, they confirm that multicollinearity was not
a concern.

4.2. Hypothesis Testing Results

As shown in Table 5, the model explains 60% of the variance in intention, 63.8% of the
variance in PV, 60.1% of the variance in ATE, and 61.2% in PU. Both PEU and PU had a
significant positive effect on the ATE (β = 0.464, β = 0.356, p < 0.01, respectively). Thus, H2
and H3 were supported. Besides that, PEU had a positive effect on PU (β = 0.782, p < 0.01).
Thus, H1 was supported. The results also show that PU and ATE have a positive impact
on IE (β = 0.224, β = 0.203, p < 0.01, respectively). Therefore, H4 and H5 were supported.
Additionally, PU (β = 0.468, p < 0.01) and PE (β = 0.224, p < 0.01) directly influenced PV.
The negative influence of PF was unexpectedly not significant on PV (β = 0.040). Thus, H6
and H7 were supported but H8 was rejected. Conversely, PR (β = 0.096, p < 0.01) was found
to have a significant negative effect on PV. It was found that PV (β = 0.381, p < 0.01) had a
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 11 of 16

positive effect on IE, supporting H10. The moderating impact of eWOM on the relationship
between ATE and IE had no statistical significance as the results related to H11 are shown
in Table 5. In terms of H12, the moderating role of eWOM on the relationship between PV
and IE (β = 0.118, p < 0.01) was supported and significant.

Table 5. Summary of hypotheses testing results.

Hypotheses Path Coefficient t-Value p Values

H1. Perceived ease of use → Perceived usefulness 0.782 *** 26.888 0.000
H2. Perceived ease of use → Attitude toward e-learning 0.464 *** 7.854 0.000
H3. Perceived usefulness → Attitude toward e-learning 0.356 *** 5.707 0.000
H4. Attitude toward e-learning → Intention toward e-learning 0.203 *** 3.822 0.000
H5. Perceived usefulness → Intention toward e-learning 0.224 *** 4.622 0.000
H6. Perceived usefulness → Perceived value 0.468 *** 9.067 0.000
H7. Perceived enjoyment → Perceived value 0.363 *** 7.036 0.000
H8. Perceived fee → Perceived value 0.040 n.s 1.255 0.210
H9. Perceived risk → Perceived value 0.096 *** 3.213 0.001
H10. Perceived value → Intention toward e-learning 0.381 *** 8.547 0.000
Moderating effect
H11. e-word of mouth → Attitude toward e-learning on Intention toward e-learning −0.015 n.s 0.338 0.736
H12. e-word of mouth → Perceived value on Intention toward e-learning 0.118 *** 2.539 0.011
*** p < 0.01. Note: ns= non-significant

5. Discussion and Implications

The primary aims of this study are as follows: Firstly, we are investigating the feasibil-
ity of integrating TAM and VAM for forecasting consumer IE. Secondly, examine the effect
of perceived benefits and sacrifices on PV. Thirdly, comparing the extent of influence of ATE
and PV on IE. Finally, we identify the moderator role of eWOM on the association between
ATE and PV in terms of e-learning intention. Several findings have been illustrated. In
the relationships among constructs in TAM, the findings of this study complement earlier
research, indicating that PEU has a considerable positive impact on PU [32,83,84] which
indicates that e-learning systems designed with functions that are easier to interact with
will generate more consumers’ PU than complex systems. The results also point out that
PEU and PU also have a strong impact on ATE [85]. Meanwhile, the impact of PU on IE
is greater than that of ATE, which means that in e-learning, PU is an extrinsic factor that
should be prioritized to be considered. This outcome is also consistent with past research
findings. [86,87].
Additionally, the findings of this study indicate the strong impact of PV on IE [88,89].
The significant role of PV in the new technology is also evident in this study. The findings
will help e-learning service providers better understand how to maximize their customers’
PV. Based on the results of two benefit variables, the positive influence of PU and PE on PV,
these results are consistent with previous studies [47] that show that the benefits acquired
from using online services are very important when predicting consumers’ PV. Additionally,
the impact of PU on PV is higher than PE [48]. Thus, by providing rich learning content
and paying attention to the learners’ experiences, the interest will increase the learners’ PV.
Besides that, the content of e-learning should be arranged in separate detailed sections and
focus on the experience of consumers to bring a sense of comfort to the learning process of
consumers in order to increase PE. Thereby, customers will have better ATE and PV will
increase. Unsurprisingly, the results show that PV has a stronger positive impact on IE
than ATE. This finding supports the results of [58]. It also proves that PV is the strongest
factor influencing IE to explore consumers’ adoption of new technologies based on two
opposing factors, including both positive and negative effects, which TAM is lacking in this
respect. Simultaneously, the results show the negative influence of PR on PV [47,48,54]. On
the contrary, PF had no significance on PV. Although these findings are inconsistent with
those of previous studies [39,51,90], based on the consumers’ perspective, they indicate that
e-learning institutions should give more consideration to PR than to PF when developing
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 12 of 16

an e-learning system. Indeed, consumers want to be protected, and they usually conduct a
risk assessment before they use a service rather than considering the fees. If learners truly
appreciate learning through an e-learning system, they are willing to trade-off fees in order
to obtain greater learning performance.
Finally, the findings of this study indicate that eWOM has a positive moderating
effect on the link between PV and IE. Consumers who have been impacted by increased
eWOM via social media will have a greater PV in terms of their willingness to accept
e-learning. In contrast to the influence of eWOM on PV and IE, consumers rarely seek
information through social networks to reinforce their attitudes towards the application
of new technologies because their attitudes are made up of beliefs about various factors,
including ease to use and usefulness. These two factors are based on individual self-efficacy
because only individuals know their abilities and what is truly useful to them [5,91]. With
the rapid growth of social networks in recent years, eWOM has become more powerful
than ever because people can easily connect to each other. They talk, share, and discuss
e-learning, and information can go viral. The PV factor can be positively influenced by
the eWOM of previous users or social influencers because consumers tend to search for
information to consider whether using e-learning is really worth what they spend in order
to maximize the value they receive. So, this will strongly affect the decision making of
other customers.
The findings of this research provide several theoretical implications for researchers.
This study confirms the evidence and feasibility of integrating TAM and VAM in research
on technology adoption in the e-learning context, as the study of [29] has demonstrated in
IoT-based smart home services. In addition, this study also shows evidence of the important
role of PV in influencing IE, which helps researchers in future studies consider the role of PV
in the application of technology. In particular, applications that are conducted in areas that
include hedonic and utilitarian value, such as research of intention to use gamification of
e-learning, virtual reality in e-learning, or AI e-learning training assistant. Furthermore, the
finding of the moderating role of eWOM strengthens the positive relationship between PV
and IE. The significant role of eWOM has a great influence on digital marketing, increasing
the PV of users and strengthening the intention to use the e-learning system.
Some managerial implications can be inferred from this study’s findings for uni-
versities or e-learning provider institutions. This study demonstrates how to design
an e-learning system around intrinsic and extrinsic incentives, perceived benefits, and
perceived sacrifices in order to attract consumers’ intention towards e-learning. Firstly,
providers of e-learning services must prioritize developing learning content that is appro-
priate to learners’ needs. Additionally, the e-learning system must be user-friendly and
adaptable to a broad range of consumers. Because learning is a long process, if the content
is excessively tough or unappealing, it reduces learners’ PV. This research finding highlights
how e-learning service providers can use the findings to gain a better understanding of
how to optimize users’ PV. Secondly, in order to reduce the anxiety levels of consumers
due to PR, e-learning service providers should provide high-security platforms that either
protect consumers’ private information or payment information. Thirdly, the wide presence
of the e-learning course on the homepage and social networks is essential in order to
attract users to give reviews and feedback on the quality of the e-learning content. This
brings great benefits to e-learning service providers based on the influence of eWOM. The
affiliation programs are recommended to be implemented in the current context, especially
for e-learning services. Finally, service providers should anticipate the impact of eWOM
because it can reduce the PV of consumers towards e-learning adoption through negative
comments or reviews. Therefore, there should be a support team for consumer care to
answer questions as well as resolve the dissatisfaction of consumers who use the service.
Positive comments or reviews can be collected from previous users at the same time to
increase PV for potential users. Additionally, the combination of these two models has
been shown to be an appropriate approach to increase students’ and users’ PV toward
sustainability e-learning based on the lifetime learning process.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 13 of 16

6. Conclusions
This study integrated TAM and VAM in order to discover critical elements affecting
a consumer’s adoption of e-learning. The findings answer the research questions and
contribute to the evidence that confirms the relationship between variables in TAM and
VAM. On the other hand, the results support the integration of TAM and VAM in practice
and confirm the moderating role of eWOM on the link of PV and IE. The research also
explored the moderator effects of eWOM on the relationship of ATE and IE, but the result
had no statistical significance. As mentioned above, [29] have confirmed the combination
of the TAM and the VAM models; thus, the results of this study support it. Therefore,
in practice, e-learning service providers can rely on it to improve service quality, optimize
customer experience, and provide information security. There were some limited points
of this research. Firstly, because the data was collected only at a university in Vietnam,
it cannot reflect the exact behavior of consumers across cultures. However, in terms of the-
ory application, [92] suggested that it is motivated by a need for scientific information about
events and interactions that occur in a range of real-world contexts. The objective of theory
application is to determine the theory’s adequacy; hence, the sample’s representativeness
of the population is insignificant. Future research should conduct a wider investigation
across more countries. Secondly, this study only dissects the general perceived fee and
risk. The inclusion of more specific factors like technicality fees and private risk would
have provided clearer observations. Additionally, the next research should examine the
role of control variables like age and income on IE. Because consumers of different ages or
incomes will have a different perspective, especially in terms of new technologies adoption,
older consumers might be much more hesitant than their younger counterparts. Finally,
this study omits an important variable in reinforcing consumer ATE in the IE that is the
e-servicescape environment, where consumers directly experience the quality of e-learning
services and enhance perceived. Therefore, future research should examine the role of
e-servicescape as an independent variable that directly affects ATE or as a moderator that
strengthens the relationship of ATE and IE. Despite these limitations, the results of this
study will have implications for further theoretical research and practical implications for
future research.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: Y.-K.L., W.-Y.W., T.Q.L., T.T.T.P.; Methodology: Y.-K.L.,

W.-Y.W., T.Q.L., T.T.T.P.; Data curation: Y.-K.L.; Formal analysis: Y.-K.L.; Project administration:
Y.-K.L., W.-Y.W.; Resources: Y.-K.L., T.Q.L., T.T.T.P.; Supervision: Y.-K.L., W.-Y.W.; Validation: Y.-K.L.,
W.-Y.W., T.Q.L.; Software: T.Q.L.; Visualization: T.T.T.P.;Writing—original draft: Y.-K.L., W.-Y.W.,
T.Q.L., T.T.T.P.; Writing—review & editing: Y.-K.L., W.-Y.W., T.Q.L., T.T.T.P. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ho, N.T.T.; Sivapalan, S.; Pham, H.H.; Nguyen, L.T.M.; Pham, A.T.V.; Dinh, H.V. Students’ adoption of e-learning in emergency
situation: The case of a Vietnamese university during COVID-19. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 2020, 18, 246–269. [CrossRef]
2. Hsia, J.; Chang, C.; Tseng, A. Effects of individuals’ locus of control and computer Self-Efficacy on their e-learning acceptance in
high-tech companies. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2014, 33, 51–64. [CrossRef]
3. Al-Azawei, A.; Parslow, P.; Lundqvist, K. Investigating the effect of learning styles in a blended e-learning system: An extension
of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2017, 33, 1–23. [CrossRef]
4. Mailizar, M.; Burg, D.; Maulina, S. Examining university students’ behavioural intention to use e-learning during the COVID-19
pandemic: An extended TAM model. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 26, 7057–7077. [CrossRef]
5. Abdullah, F.; Ward, R.; Ahmed, E. Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables of TAM on students’
Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 63, 75–90. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 14 of 16

6. Ajibade, P. Technology acceptance model limitations and criticisms: Exploring the practical applications and use in technology-
related studies, mixed-method, and qualitative researches. Libr. Philos. Pract. 2018. Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.
edu/libphilprac/1941. (accessed on 19 December 2021).
7. Tarhini, A.; Arachchilage, N.A.G.; Abbasi, M.S. A critical review of theories and models of technology adoption and acceptance
in information system research. Int. J. Technol. Diffus. 2015, 6, 58–77. [CrossRef]
8. Liu, I.; Chen, M.C.; Sun, Y.S.; Wible, D.; Kuo, C. Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect Intention to Use an
Online Learning Community. Comput. Educ. 2010, 54, 600–610. [CrossRef]
9. Agudo-Peregrina, Á.F.; Hernández-García, Á.; Pascual-Miguel, F.J. Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of
electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 34,
301–314. [CrossRef]
10. Šumak, B.; Heričko, M.; Pušnik, M. A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning
technology types. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 2067–2077. [CrossRef]
11. Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Yahaya, N.; Aldraiweesh, A.A.; Alamri, M.M.; Aljarboa, N.A.; Alturki, U.; Aljeraiwi, A.A. Integrating technology
acceptance model with innovation diffusion theory: An empirical investigation on students’ intention to use E-learning systems.
IEEE Access 2019, 7, 26797–26809. [CrossRef]
12. Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.P.; Warshaw, P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models.
Manag. Sci. 1989, 35, 982–1003. [CrossRef]
13. Kim, H.W.; Chan, H.C.; Gupta, S. Value-based adoption of mobile internet: An empirical investigation. Decis. Support Syst. 2007,
43, 111–126. [CrossRef]
14. Chen, F.H. Sustainable Education through E-Learning: The Case Study of iLearn2.0. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10186. [CrossRef]
15. Khan, M.A.; Nabi, M.K.; Khojah, M.; Tahir, M. Students’ perception towards e-learning during COVID-19 pandemic in India: An
empirical study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 57. [CrossRef]
16. Alam, M.M.; Ahmad, N.; Naveed, Q.N.; Patel, A.; Abohashrh, M.; Khaleel, M.A. E-learning services to achieve sustainable
learning and academic performance: An empirical study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2653. [CrossRef]
17. Shroff, R.; Deneen, C.; Ng, D. Analysis of the technology acceptance model in examining students’ behavioural intention to use
an e-portfolio system. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2011, 27, 600–618. [CrossRef]
18. King, W.R.; He, J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 2006, 43, 740–755. [CrossRef]
19. Tang, K.Y.; Chang, C.Y.; Hwang, G.J. Trends in artificial intelligence-supported e-learning: A systematic review and co-citation
network analysis (1998–2019). Interact. Learn. Environ. 2021, 1–19. [CrossRef]
20. Klašnja-Milićević, A.; Ivanović, M. E-Learning Personalization Systems and Sustainable Education. Sustainability 2021, 13,
6713. [CrossRef]
21. Jang, J.; Ko, Y.; Shin, W.S.; Han, I. Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality for Learning: An Examination Using an Extended
Technology Acceptance Model. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 6798–6809. [CrossRef]
22. Setiyani, L. Using Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM 3) at Selected Private Technical High School: Google Drive Storage in
E-Learning. Utamax J. Ultim. Res. Trends Educ. 2021, 3, 80–89. [CrossRef]
23. Chang, C.T.; Hajiyev, J.; Su, C.R. Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in Azerbaijan? The general
extended technology acceptance model for e-learning approach. Comput. Educ. 2017, 111, 128–143. [CrossRef]
24. Chu, T.H.; Chen, Y.Y. With good we become good: Understanding e-learning adoption by theory of planned behavior and group
influences. Comput. Educ. 2016, 92, 37–52. [CrossRef]
25. Farhan, W.; Razmak, J.; Demers, S.; Laflamme, S. E-learning systems versus instructional communication tools: Developing and
testing a new e-learning user interface from the perspectives of teachers and students. Technol. Soc. 2019, 59, 101192. [CrossRef]
26. Mohammadi, H. Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model. Comput. Hum.
Behav. 2015, 45, 359–374. [CrossRef]
27. Lew, S.L.; Lau, S.H.; Leow, M.C. Usability factors predicting continuance of intention to use cloud e-learning application. Heliyon
2019, 5, e01788.
28. Prasetyo, Y.T.; Ong, A.K.S.; Concepcion, G.K.F.; Navata, F.M.B.; Robles, R.A.V.; Tomagos, I.J.T.; Young, M.N.; Diaz, J.F.T.;
Nadlifatin, R.; Redi, A.A.N.P. Determining Factors Affecting Acceptance of E-Learning Platforms during the COVID-19 Pandemic:
Integrating Extended Technology Acceptance Model and DeLone & McLean IS Success Model. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8365.
29. Kim, Y.; Park, Y.; Choi, J. A study on the adoption of IoT smart home service: Using Value-based Adoption Model. Total Qual.
Manag. Bus. Excell. 2017, 28, 1149–1165. [CrossRef]
30. Sohn, K.; Kwon, O. Technology acceptance theories and factors influencing artificial Intelligence-based intelligent products.
Telemat. Inform. 2020, 47, 101324. [CrossRef]
31. Liang, T.P.; Lin, Y.L.; Hou, H.C. What drives consumers to adopt a sharing platform: An integrated model of value-based and
transaction cost theories. Inf. Manag. 2021, 58, 103471. [CrossRef]
32. Pando-Garcia, J.; Periañez-Cañadillas, I.; Charterina, J. Business simulation games with and without supervision: An analysis
based on the TAM model. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 1731–1736. [CrossRef]
33. Wu, B.; Zhang, C. Empirical study on continuance intentions towards Elearning 2.0 systems. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2014, 33,
1027–1038. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 15 of 16

34. Pavlou, P.A. Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model.
Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2003, 7, 101–134.
35. Okazaki, S.; Renda dos Santos, L. Understanding e-learning adoption in Brazil: Major determinants and gender effects. Int. Rev.
Res. Open Distance Learn. 2012, 13, 91–106. [CrossRef]
36. Padilla-Melendez, A.; Aguila-Obra, A.R.D.; Garrido-Moreno, A. Perceived playfulness, gender differences and technology
acceptance model in a blended learning scenario. Comput. Educ. 2013, 63, 306–317. [CrossRef]
37. Ayeh, J.K. Travellers’ acceptance of consumer-generated media: An integrated model of technology acceptance and source
credibility theories. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 48, 173–180. [CrossRef]
38. Ifinedo, P. Examining students’ intention to continue using blogs for learning: Perspectives from technology acceptance,
motivational, and social-cognitive frameworks. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 72, 189–199. [CrossRef]
39. Lu, H.P.; Lin, K.Y. Factors influencing online auction sellers’ intention to pay: An empirical study integrating network externalities
with perceived value. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2012, 13, 238.
40. Chen, C.-C.; Hsiao, K.-L.; Wu, S.-J. Purchase intention in social commerce: An empirical examination of perceived value and
social awareness. Libr. Hi Tech 2018, 36, 583–604. [CrossRef]
41. Song, B.K. E-portfolio implementation: Examining learners’ perception of usefulness, self-directed learning process and value of
learning. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2020, 37, 68–81. [CrossRef]
42. Molinillo, S.; Aguilar-Illescas, R.; Anaya-Sánchez, R.; Liébana-Cabanillas, F. Social commerce website design, perceived value
and loyalty behavior intentions: The moderating roles of gender, age and frequency of use. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 63,
102404. [CrossRef]
43. Luo, C. Study on mobile commerce customer based on value adoption. J. Appl. Sci. 2014, 14, 901–909.
44. Teo, T. Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Comput. Educ. 2011, 57,
2432–2440. [CrossRef]
45. Balog, A.; Pribeanu, C. The role of perceived enjoyment in the students’ acceptance of an augmented reality teaching platform:
A structural equation modelling approach. Stud. Inform. Control 2010, 19, 319–330. [CrossRef]
46. Chung, N.; Koo, C. The use of social media in travel information search. Telemat. Inform. 2015, 32, 215–229. [CrossRef]
47. Yang, H.; Yu, J.; Zo, H.; Choi, M. User acceptance of wearable devices: An extended perspective of perceived value. Telemat.
Inform. 2016, 33, 256–269. [CrossRef]
48. Yu, J.; Lee, H.; Ha, I.; Zo, H. User acceptance of media tablets: An empirical examination of perceived value. Telemat. Inform. 2017,
34, 206–223. [CrossRef]
49. Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark. 1988,
52, 2–22. [CrossRef]
50. Chong, X.; Zhang, J.; Lai, K.K.; Nie, L. An empirical analysis of mobile internet acceptance from a value–based view. Int. J. Mob.
Commun. 2012, 10, 536–557. [CrossRef]
51. Wang, Y.S.; Yeh, C.H.; Liao, Y.W. What drives purchase intention in the context of online content services? The moderating role of
ethical self-efficacy for online piracy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2013, 33, 199–208. [CrossRef]
52. Newel, F.; Newell-Lemon, K. Wireless Rules; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2001.
53. Grewal, D.; Gotlieb, J.; Marmorstein, H. The moderating effects of message framing and source credibility on the price-perceived
risk relationship. J. Consum. Res. 1994, 21, 145–153. [CrossRef]
54. Snoj, B.; Korda, A.P.; Mumel, D. The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk and perceived product value. J. Prod.
Brand Manag. 2004, 13, 156–167. [CrossRef]
55. Wu, J.H.C.; Lin, Y.C.; Hsu, F.S. An empirical analysis of synthesizing the effects of service quality, perceived value, corporate
image and customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions in the transport industry: A case of Taiwan high-speed rail. Innov. Mark.
2011, 7, 83–100.
56. Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N.; Johnson, L.W. Retail service quality and perceived value: A comparison of two models. J. Retail.
Consum. Serv. 1997, 4, 39–48. [CrossRef]
57. Kwon, H.K.; Seo, K.K. Application of value-based adoption model to analyze saas adoption behavior in korean b2b cloud market.
Int. J. Adv. Comput. Technol. 2013, 5, 368–373.
58. Hsiao, K.L.; Chen, C.C. Value-based adoption of e-book subscription services: The roles of environmental concerns and reading
habits. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 434–448. [CrossRef]
59. Calvo-Porral, C.; Lévy-Mangin, J.P. Store brands’ purchase intention: Examining the role of perceived quality. Eur. Res. Manag.
Bus. Econ. 2017, 23, 90–95. [CrossRef]
60. Hennig-Thurau, T.; Gwinner, K.P.; Walsh, G.; Gremler, D.D. Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What
motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 38–52. [CrossRef]
61. De Bruyn, A.; Lilien, G.L. A multi-stage model of word-of-mouth influence through viral marketing. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2008, 25,
151–163. [CrossRef]
62. Jeong, H.J.; Koo, D.M. Combined effects of valence and attributes of e-WOM on consumer judgment for message and product.
Internet Res. 2015, 25, 2–29. [CrossRef]
63. Kudeshia, C.; Kumar, A. Social eWOM: Does it affect the brand attitude and purchase intention of brands? Manag. Res. Rev. 2017,
40, 310–330. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 815 16 of 16

64. He, S.X.; Bond, S.D. Why is the crowd divided? Attributionfor dispersion in online word of mouth. J. Consum. Res. 2015, 41,
1509–1527. [CrossRef]
65. Zhang, H.; Liang, X.; Qi, C. Investigating the impact of interpersonal closeness and social status on electronic word-of-mouth
effectiveness. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 130, 453–461. [CrossRef]
66. Naujoks, A.; Benkenstein, M. Who is behind the message? The power of expert reviews on eWOM platforms. Electron. Commer.
Res. Appl. 2020, 44, 101015. [CrossRef]
67. Lien, C.H.; Cao, Y. Examining WeChat users’ motivations, trust, attitudes, and positive word-of-mouth: Evidence from China.
Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 41, 104–111. [CrossRef]
68. Wang, J.J.; Wang, L.Y.; Wang, M.M. Understanding the effects of eWOM social ties on purchase intentions: A moderated mediation
investigation. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2018, 28, 54–62. [CrossRef]
69. Lee, M.S.; An, H. A study of antecedents influencing eWOM for online lecture website. Online Inf. Rev. 2018, 42,
1048–1064. [CrossRef]
70. Shehzadi, S.; Nisar, Q.A.; Hussain, M.S.; Basheer, M.F.; Hameed, W.U.; Chaudhry, N.I. The role of digital learning toward students’
satisfaction and university brand image at educational institutes of Pakistan: A post-effect of COVID-19. Asian Educ. Dev. Stud.
2020, 10, 276–294. [CrossRef]
71. Agarwal, R.; Karahanna, E. Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology
usage. MIS Q. 2000, 24, 665–694. [CrossRef]
72. Voss, G.B.; Parasuraman, A.; Grewal, D. The roles of price, performance, and expectations in determining satisfaction in service
exchanges. J. Mark. 1998, 62, 46–61. [CrossRef]
73. Chu, S.C.; Kim, Y. Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. Int. J.
Advert. 2011, 30, 47–75. [CrossRef]
74. Sun, T.; Youn, S.; Wu, G.; Kuntaraporn, M. Online word-of-mouth (or mouse): An exploration of its antecedents and consequences.
J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2006, 11, 1104–1127. [CrossRef]
75. Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.M. SmartPLS 3. Bönningstedt: SmartPLS. 2015. Available online: https://www.smartpls.com
(accessed on 3 June 2021).
76. Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19, 139–152. [CrossRef]
77. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of
the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879. [CrossRef]
78. Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Mod. Methods Bus. Res. 1998, 295, 295–336.
79. Höck, C.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. Management of multi-purpose stadiums: Importance and performance measurement of
service interfaces. Int. J. Serv. Technol. Manag. 2010, 14, 188–207. [CrossRef]
80. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res.
1981, 18, 39–50. [CrossRef]
81. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation
modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [CrossRef]
82. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage
Publ. 2015, 38, 220–221.
83. Perry, A. Consumers’ acceptance of smart virtual closets. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 33, 171–177. [CrossRef]
84. Roy, S.K.; Balaji, M.S.; Quazi, A.; Quaddus, M. Predictors of customer acceptance of and resistance to smart technologies in the
retail sector. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 42, 147–160. [CrossRef]
85. Lee, B.C.; Yoon, J.O.; Lee, I. Learners’ acceptance of e-learning in South Korea: Theories and results. Comput. Educ. 2009, 53,
1320–1329. [CrossRef]
86. Nikou, S.A.; Economides, A.A. Mobile-Based Assessment: Integrating acceptance and motivational factors into a combined
model of Self-Determination Theory and Technology Acceptance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 68, 83–95. [CrossRef]
87. Verma, P.; Sinha, N. Integrating perceived economic wellbeing to technology acceptance model: The case of mobile based
agricultural extension service. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 126, 207–216. [CrossRef]
88. Alwahaishi, S.; Snásel, V. Acceptance and use of information and communications technology: A UTAUT and flow based
theoretical model. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2013, 8, 61–73. [CrossRef]
89. Fang, J.; Wen, C.; George, B.; Prybutok, V.R. Consumer heterogeneity, perceived value, and repurchase decision-making in online
shopping: The role of gender, age, and shopping motives. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2016, 17, 116.
90. Hsiao, K.L. Why internet users are willing to pay for social networking services. Online Inf. Rev. 2011, 35, 770–788. [CrossRef]
91. Lee, D.Y.; Lehto, M.R. User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model.
Comput. Educ. 2013, 61, 193–208. [CrossRef]
92. Calder, B.J.; Phillips, L.W.; Tybout, A.M. Designing research for application. J. Consum. Res. 1981, 8, 197–207. [CrossRef]