Interactive Learning Environments

ISSN: 1049-4820 (Print) 1744-5191 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nile20

Key characteristics in designing massive open

online courses (MOOCs) for user acceptance:
an application of the extended technology
acceptance model

Da Tao, Pei Fu, Yunhui Wang, Tingru Zhang & Xingda Qu

To cite this article: Da Tao, Pei Fu, Yunhui Wang, Tingru Zhang & Xingda Qu (2019): Key
characteristics in designing massive open online courses (MOOCs) for user acceptance: an
application of the extended technology acceptance model, Interactive Learning Environments, DOI:
10.1080/10494820.2019.1695214

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1695214

Published online: 27 Nov 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 26

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=nile20
INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1695214

Key characteristics in designing massive open online courses

(MOOCs) for user acceptance: an application of the extended
technology acceptance model
Da Taoa, Pei Fub, Yunhui Wangc, Tingru Zhanga and Xingda Qua
a
Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China;
b
Department of Management Engineering, Hunan Construction Technical College, Changsha, People’s Republic of
China; cSchool of Information Engineering, Heilongjiang Forestry Vocation-Technical College, Heilongjiang, People’s
Republic of China

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

In spite of the proliferation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in Received 23 January 2019
higher education, factors influencing user acceptance of MOOCs are not Accepted 17 November 2019
well understood. This study is intended to investigate key characteristics
KEYWORDS
of user acceptance from interface design (i.e. usability), content quality MOOC; technology
(i.e. perceived quality), and emotional arousal (i.e. perceived enjoyment) acceptance model; usability;
of MOOCs within the framework of Technology Acceptance Model perceived enjoyment;
(TAM). Six hundred and sixty-eight college students were invited to perceived quality
complete a self-reported questionnaire measuring TAM constructs and
three hypothesized variables drawn from MOOC characteristics. The
results from path analysis showed that all path coefficients were
statistically significant. Perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and
perceived enjoyment significantly affected students’ behavioral
intention to use MOOCs, while both perceived usefulness and behavioral
intention yielded a significant influence on perceived effective use of
MOOCs. Usability and perceived quality had a strong indirect impact on
behavioral intention and perceived effective use through the mediators
of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and perceived
enjoyment. This study demonstrated that the extended TAM with MOOC
characteristics provides an effective means to understand students’
acceptance of MOOCs.

Introduction
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), as innovative online learning tools that are available to a
large-scale of people without time and location limitations, have gained increasing popularity in
recent years (Jung & Lee, 2018; Kizilcec, Saltarelli, Reich, & Cohen, 2017). A number of companies,
institutions and platforms are providing a variety of MOOCs for global users (Kahl, 2015). Nowadays,
MOOCs have been endorsed as a major advancement of higher education.
Different from traditional education approaches, MOOCs, representing the latest stage in the evol-
ution of open educational resources, have a number of advantages. Firstly, MOOCs can be accessed
by a large number (also a diverse range) of users without geographical barriers and resource limit-
ations. Secondly, the cost associated with MOOCs is much lower than traditional education
approaches, and users can be easily enrolled in both formal and informal ways. Thirdly, MOOCs
are characterized by digitization and utilize advanced information technologies and multiple-
media channels to present educational resources, enabling a wide range of teaching and learning

CONTACT Xingda Qu quxd@szu.edu.cn

© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 D. TAO ET AL.

activities to be completed online. Finally, MOOCs are flexible and adjustable to context and time, and
therefore allow users to take control of the learning process. It has been widely recognized that
MOOCs hold the potential to overcome disparity issues on border, race, gender, income, and logis-
tical inconvenience (Kizilcec et al., 2017).
Despite impressive advances in their development and advantages, MOOCs are not always sus-
tainably used and accepted by users. In fact, MOOCs have been criticized for their high dropout
rates (as high as 80–95%) since their inception (Bartolomé & Steffens, 2015; Zhang, Chen, Phang, &
Zhang, 2018). The high dropout rates may be largely due to users’ non-acceptance (Wu & Chen,
2016). Not only does non-acceptance mean a loss of return on investment, but also suggest that
users cannot realize the full benefits of MOOCs. Therefore, the troubling problem of underused or
unaccepted MOOCs remains a central concern in MOOC practice.
In light of this, how to improve users’ acceptance and effective use has been a subject of great
concern in MOOC research. A number of studies have examined factors explaining user acceptance
of online learning by using varied theories, among which, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
and its extended models are the most widely used due to their parsimony and effectiveness in
explaining acceptance behavior (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Mendoza, Jung, & Kobayashi,
2017; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). For example, Hsu, Chen, and Ting (2018) examined
determinants of Taiwan learners’ continuance intention for MOOC usage by integrating TAM and
social support theory. Fianu, Blewett, Ampong, and Ofori (2018) examined factors that influenced
MOOC adoption among Ghanaian students based on an updated version of TAM, i.e. the Unified
Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. However, previous studies mostly focused on the
roles of demographic and psychosocial factors in user acceptance, such as gender, motivation,
culture, personal innovativeness and self-efficacy (Agudo-Peregrina & Pascual-Miguel, 2014;
Dečman, 2015; Fianu et al., 2018; Hsu et al., 2018; Mendoza et al., 2017; Mohammadi, 2015; Šumak,
HeričKo, & Pušnik, 2011; Wu & Chen, 2016; Zhou, 2016). Few of them presented significant solutions
to problems related to effective design and implementation of online learning from the aspects of
interface design, content quality and emotional arousal, all of which are closely related to user experi-
ence and continuous use of a technical system (Belanche, Casaló, & Guinalíu, 2012; Heijden, 2004;
Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). This is a significant concern as it leaves MOOC designers and managers
without clear guidance of how to do to promote user acceptance of MOOCs. To fill this research
gap, this study proposed a MOOC acceptance model to explore factors affecting students’ accep-
tance and use of MOOCs within the framework of TAM from the aspects of interface design,
content quality and emotional arousal.

Literature review and research hypotheses

Technology acceptance theories
A review of the literature suggested that there are many theories and models that explain and predict
individuals’ behaviors in technology acceptance and usage, such as Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA),
Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), Motivational Model (MM), Innovation
Diffusion Theory (IDT) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Some recent studies have also
developed new technology usage models. For example, Chen and Lin (2018) proposed a live-
stream usage intention model, and verified that flow, entertainment, social interaction, and endorse-
ment were significant predictors of live-stream usage intention. Hsiao and Chen (2018) developed a
smartwatch purchase intention model, and they found that interface convenience, perceived content,
perceived infrastructure and design aesthetics were antecedents of smartwatch purchase intention.
While theories such as TRA, TPB, MM and SCT, emphasize more on psychological aspects of human
behaviors, TAM can be easily integrated with external factors that are more likely lead to practical
implications in technology design and implementation. In addition, reviews of the literature
suggest that TAM usually accounts for as high as 30–50% of IT acceptance (Holden & Karsh, 2010;
 INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 3

Šumak et al., 2011; Tao et al., 2020). Therefore, TAM has become the most widely used technology
acceptance theory due to its robustness, parsimony, and predictive power in studies over a wide
range of information systems. In the present study, we also chose TAM as the theoretical framework.
Figure 1 presents the proposed model. In the remainder of this section, we described the rationale of
variables in the model and developed hypotheses among them.

Technology acceptance model (TAM)

Adapting theories from social-psychological/behavioral literature, mainly the Theory of Reasoned
Action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), TAM states that the most proximal antecedent to technology use
is behavioral intention, which is now commonly regarded as the agent of acceptance (Tao et al.,
2018; Venkatesh et al., 2003), and is also a widely validated predictor of actual behavior (Venkatesh
et al., 2003). Behavioral intention is determined by two beliefs: perceived usefulness and perceived
ease of use. Perceived usefulness is defined as the extent to which an individual believes that
using a technology will enhance his/her task performance, and perceived ease of use refers to the
extent to which an individual believes that using a technology will be free of effort (Davis et al.,
1989). In addition, perceived ease of use has a significant and positive effect on perceived usefulness.
TAM models are consistently shown to be able to explain technology acceptance in varied contexts,
such as social network applications (Chen, Tao, & Zhou, 2019), automated vehicles (Zhang et al., 2019)
and health informatics (Tao et al., 2018). The models have also been tested and extended in MOOC
and other e-learning applications (Agudo-Peregrina & Pascual-Miguel, 2014; Fianu et al., 2018; Hsu
et al., 2018; Mohammadi, 2015; Šumak et al., 2011; Wu & Chen, 2016). For example, Hsu et al.
(2018) compared behavioral intention patterns of traditional e-learning platform and MOOCs, and
found that sense of community and perceived gains influence learners’ behavioral intention of
both general e-learning platform and MOOCs. Fianu et al. (2018) found that MOOC usage intention
is influenced by computer self-efficacy, performance expectancy, and system quality, while MOOC
usage was influenced by facilitating conditions, instructional quality, and MOOC usage intention.
Based on previous evidence in TAM studies, the following hypotheses were developed:
H1: Behavioral intention to use MOOCs would positively affect usage behavior of MOOCs.

H2: Perceived usefulness of MOOCs will positively affect usage behavior of MOOCs.

H3: Perceived usefulness of MOOCs will positively affect behavioral intention to use MOOCs.

H4: Perceived ease of use of MOOCs will positively affect behavioral intention to use MOOCs.

H5: Perceived ease of use of MOOCs will positively affect perceived usefulness of MOOCs.

Figure 1. The proposal research model.

4 D. TAO ET AL.

External variables
While the TAM has been widely validated and extended in various contexts, its application to the
modeling of MOOC acceptance has been limited (Fianu et al., 2018; Hsu et al., 2018; Wu & Chen,
2016; Zhou, 2016). There is a concurrent need to gain empirical evidence for the support of such
model within MOOC and examine user acceptance to facilitate the development and implementation
of MOOC applications. In addition, some have argued that the model must be extended with external
variables to enhance model explanation and prediction power, especially given the fact that the TAM
is not specifically developed for MOOC contexts. In fact, the examination of additional explanatory
variables drawn from specific technology context is a common and widely accepted practice in
TAM studies. This study drew three MOOC characteristics (i.e. usability, perceived quality, and per-
ceived enjoyment) that have seldom been examined in previous studies. The characteristics were
chosen to reflect interface design, content quality, and emotional arousal of MOOCs, respectively.
We posited that they were effective antecedents to TAM constructs.

Perceived enjoyment
Based on the definition by Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1992), perceived enjoyment in this study
refers to the extent to which the activity of using MOOCs for learning is “perceived to be enjoyable
in its own right, apart from any performance consequences that may be anticipated” (emphasis in
the original). Based on this definition, perceived enjoyment is a form of intrinsic motivation that
can lead to emotional arousal. A number of studies have urged the need to include intrinsic motiv-
ation in explaining technology acceptance and usage (Lee, Cheung, & Chen, 2005). In our study, per-
ceived enjoyment was proposed as the intrinsic motivator for using MOOCs. Beliefs about MOOC
enjoyment play a significant role in users’ acceptance of MOOCs. Different from the traditional class-
room environment, MOOCs not only provide users with an innovative and useful platform to partici-
pate in learning, but also serve a hedonic purpose that creates enjoyable learning experience. The
design of current MOOCs is characterized by interactive ways of learning, attractive exercises, and
the use of multimedia technology (Kahl, 2015). Through the use of MOOCs, users can learn in a
self-paced way, feel more playful and affiliate more with their peers and teachers. Therefore, users
are likely to have enjoyable perceptions on MOOCs. Although the primary advantages of MOOCs,
such as convenience, efficiency, and sense of community, are related to utilitarian perspectives,
the hedonic aspects of MOOCs such as enjoyment are also likely to affect users’ learning activities.
In fact, enjoyment has been shown as a major factor that drives users to use a new technology. Pre-
vious studies have consistently found that perceived enjoyment is associated with perceived ease of
use, perceived usefulness and behavioral intention in varied technologies, such as Microcomputer,
Internet usage, Internet based learning (Davis et al., 1992; Lee et al., 2005; Venkatesh & Davis,
2000; Venkatesh, Speier, & Morris, 2002). It may mean that if users perceive the use of MOOCs as
enjoyable, they are more likely to have a favorable feeling towards the ease of use and usefulness
of MOOCs and a higher degree of intention to use them. Thus, we hypothesized that:
H6: perceived enjoyment will positively affect perceived usefulness of MOOCs

H7: perceived enjoyment will positively affect perceived ease of use of MOOCs

H8: perceived enjoyment will positively affect behavioral intention of MOOCs

Perceived quality
From the users’ perspective, the use of MOOCs for learning includes a number of experiences that are
different from traditional classroom learning, such as information search, interface navigation, self-
control of learning process, online communication with other members, and online examination.
This suggests that users’ evaluation of the quality of MOOCs may also differ from that of traditional
classroom learning. In our study, perceived quality refers to users’ overall perceptions of the
 INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 5

excellence and effectiveness of educational services offered by MOOCs (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). It
includes users’ subjective evaluation of instructional design, course content, and system features. In
other words, users will consider how well MOOC applications are able to fulfill their learning purpose.
Previous studies have showed that heightened quality perceptions positively affect perceived useful-
ness (Ahn, Ryu, & Han, 2004, 2007; Vijayasarathy, 2004). Ahn et al. (2004) investigated perceptions of
online shoppers, and found that perceived quality, including system quality, information quality and
service quality would directly influence perceived usefulness of internet shopping malls. Chen and
Tan (2004) found that service quality positively influenced attitude toward using virtual stores,
while product quality positively influenced perceived usefulness of virtual stores. In addition, high
quality MOOCs may result in the perception that users’ learning experience is fun and enjoyable.
For example, it shows that online retail stores that appeal to users’ hedonic motivations will bring
greater enjoyment and fun for the users (Ahn, Ryu, & Han, 2007; Childers, Carr, Peck, & Carson,
2001). It is likely that people may also tend to enjoy the interaction experience with MOOCs if
they perceive MOOCs of high quality. Perceived quality therefore may largely determine users’
decision on whether they accept MOOCs or not. Accordingly, we hypothesized that:
H9: Perceived quality will positively affect perceived usefulness of MOOCs

H10: Perceived quality will positively affect perceived enjoyment of MOOCs

Usability
MOOC applications, like many other technical systems, rely heavily on interface design for infor-
mation presentation and appropriate interaction with users. Interface design, often equated to usabil-
ity, has a significant impact on users’ performance and perceptions regarding the systems (Douneva,
Jaron, & Thielsch, 2016; Hazzenzahl, 2004; Russ et al., 2014). Usability refers to the extent to which a
system interface can be used to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction
(ISO, 9241-11, 1998). It has been repeatedly shown that usability barriers could result in frustration
and irritation for users, and in a high likelihood of technology abandonment (Lazard et al., 2016;
Or & Tao, 2012). Usability is correlated with users’ satisfaction, loyalty and attitude towards a technol-
ogy (Belanche et al., 2012; Calisir & Calisir, 2004; Lee, Moon, Kim, & Yi, 2015), and therefore likely con-
tributes to acceptance. For example, a recent study demonstrated that users’ usability performance
could influence their continuance intention of health information portals (Tao et al., 2018). Green and
Pearson found that usability affected perceived ease of use of an electronic commerce website
(Green & Pearson, 2011). Lazard et al. (2016) demonstrated that usability dimensions, such as simpli-
city, could influence perceived ease of use of patient portals. In addition, users are more likely to enjoy
interaction experience with a system (Lee et al., 2015; Schaik & Ling, 2011) and consider the system of
high quality (Schaik & Ling, 2011), if its interface is well-designed and usable. In summary, there is a
large body of evidence on the links between usability and perceived ease of use, perceived enjoy-
ment, and perceived quality. Based on these arguments, we proposed that:
H11: Usability will positively affect perceived ease of use of MOOCs

H12: Usability will positively affect perceived enjoyment of MOOCs

H13: Usability will positively affect perceived quality of MOOCs

Methods
Participants and procedures
Participants were randomly recruited from several university campuses in South China by poster
announcement. Students that were currently registered in or had taken at least one MOOC before
were eligible for inclusion and were invited to complete an online survey. Six hundred and sixty-
6 D. TAO ET AL.

eight participants (334 males and 334 females) completed the survey, and their data were used for
analysis. Their mean (SD) age was 21.8 (2.1) years. Ninety-six percent of participants were under-
graduate students, while the rest were enrolled in postgraduate programs. The participants were pro-
portionately distributed in art (19.5%), science (19.2%), business (21.9%) and engineering (39.5%). The
majority of the students used MOOCs for learning daily (28.5%), weekly (37.1%) or monthly (21.9%).

Instruments
The acceptance questionnaire was adapted from measurement items validated by prior research.
Some of the measurement items were modified to reflect MOOC context and for better fit for our
study scenarios. Behavioral intention was assessed with three items drawn from Venkatesh et al.
(2003). Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use were assessed using four-item scales
adapted from Davis et al. (1989), respectively. Perceived enjoyment was assessed using a three-
item scale adapted from previous literature (Lee et al., 2005). Perceived quality was assessed by a
two-item scale adapted from Venkatesh and Davis (2000). Usability was measured with a six-item
scale (Belanche et al., 2012). Usage behavior was measured by self-reported perceived effective
use, with one item developed within this study (i.e. “To what extent do you use the MOOCs as
much as you need to use it?”). Many TAM studies measured usage behavior with frequency or dur-
ation measures (Davis et al., 1989; Davis et al., 1992; Estebanmillat, Martínezlópez, Pujoljover, Gázque-
zabad, & Alegret, 2018; Martins & Kellermanns, 2004). However, in e-learning contexts, neither
frequency nor duration of use is necessarily relevant to learning efficiency and effectiveness (Wei,
Peng, & Chou, 2015). Because of such concern, we used the new “perceived effective use”
measure. Items for all constructs were rated on 7-point Likert-type scales, ranging from “Never” (1)
to “Always” (7) for perceived effective use, and from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree”
for other constructs. The operationalization of the questionnaire items is shown in Table 1.

Data analysis
Convergent validity was assessed using three criterion proposed by Fornell and Larcker (1981): (1)
item reliability, (2) composite reliability of each construct and (3) average variance extracted (AVE).
The item reliability was assessed by verifying that all item factor loadings are significant and
greater than 0.50 (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006). The composite reliability is con-
sidered good if it is larger than 0.80 (DeVellis, 2003). The AVE is adequate if it is larger than 0.50
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the square root of the
AVE for a given construct with its correlations with all other constructs, and was consider adequate
if the square root of the AVE is larger than the correlations.
Path analysis was used to test the fit between the research model (Figure 1) and the data. Path
coefficients were estimated using the maximum likelihood estimates method. Eight commonly
used goodness-of-fit indices were employed to assess the overall model fit. A good fit was indicated
by the ratio of χ2 to degrees of freedom (χ2 /df < 5), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI ≥ 0.90), the
adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI ≥ 0.80), the comparative fit index (CFI ≥ 0.90), the normed fit
index (NFI ≥ 0.90), the incremental fit index (IFI ≥ 0.90), the Tucker Lewis index (TLI ≥ 0.90), root
mean square error of approximation (RMSEA < 0.10). AMOS 21 was used to validate the proposed
model.

Results
Convergent and discriminate validity
As shown in Table 1, factor loadings of all the items ranged from 0.65–0.90, which exceeded the rec-
ommended value of 0.5. The composite reliability of all the constructs ranged from 0.87–0.92, all
 INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 7

Table 1. Measurement items in the questionnaire.

Standardized Cranach’s Composite
Constructs Items factor loading α reliability AVE
Usability . In the MOOCs, everything is easy to understand. 0.65 0.84 0.88 0.55
. The MOOCs are simple to use, even when using 0.71
them for the first time.
. It is easy to find the information I need from the 0.77
MOOCs.
. The structure and contents of the MOOCs are 0.79
easy to understand.
. The organization of the contents of the MOOCs 0.77
makes them easy for me to know where I am
when navigating in them.
. When I am navigating in the MOOCs, I feel that I 0.76
am in control of what I can do.
Perceived . I find using the MOOCs to be enjoyable 0.85 0.84 0.90 0.75
enjoyment . The actual process of using the MOOCs is 0.88
pleasant
. I have fun using the MOOCs 0.87
Perceived . The quality of educational services I get from the 0.90 0.77 0.90 0.81
quality MOOCs is high.
. I have no problem with the quality of 0.90
educational services from the MOOCs.
Perceived ease . It is easy for me to use the MOOCs. 0.84 0.87 0.91 0.71
of use . Using the MOOCs makes them easy for me to 0.80
achieve the goal I want.
. It is easy for me to become skillful at using the 0.87
MOOCs.
. I find the MOOCs easy to use. 0.87
Perceived . Using the MOOCs improves my performance in 0.81 0.81 0.87 0.64
usefulness my learning.
. Using the MOOCs save my time in achieving the 0.78
learning goal I want.
. Using the MOOCs enhances the effectiveness in 0.86
my learning.
. I find the MOOCs to be useful in my learning. 0.75
Behavioral . I intend to use the MOOCs in the future. 0.86 0.87 0.92 0.79
intention . I predict I would use the MOOCs in the future. 0.91
. I plan to use the MOOCs in the future. 0.90
AVE, average variance extracted.

above the recommended value of 0.80. The AVE for all the constructs exceeded 0.50. Therefore, the
convergent validity for the proposed constructs was adequate. Table 2 shows that the square roots of
the AVE for each construct were larger than its correlations with all other constructs. Therefore, the
discriminate validity of the constructs appeared satisfactory.

Model testing
Although the Chi-square statistic (χ2 = 33.3, p < 0.001) is significant, the fit statistics indicate that the
model provided a good fit to the data (see Table 3). Figure 2 depicts the results of the estimated
model, and Table 4 demonstrates the results of the hypothesis testing. The amount of variance in
perceived effective use accounted for by behavioral intention and perceived usefulness was 28%.
Together, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and perceived enjoyment explained 48% of
the total variance in behavioral intention.
In the model, behavioral intention (β = 0.18, p < 0.001) and perceived usefulness (β = 0.29, p <
0.001) significantly predicted perceived effective use, so that both hypothesis H1 and H2 were sup-
ported. Perceived usefulness (β = 0.17, p < 0.01) and perceived ease of use (β = 0.23, p < 0.001) were
found to significantly affect behavioral intention, so that both hypothesis H3 and H4 were supported.
Perceived ease of use also indirectly influenced behavioral intention through perceived usefulness (β
8 D. TAO ET AL.

Table 2. Means and correlations of constructs.

Perceived Perceived Perceived Perceived Behavioural Perceived
Constructs Usability enjoyment quality ease of use usefulness intention effective use
Usability 0.74
Perceived enjoyment 0.46** 0.87
Perceived quality 0.45** 0.43** 0.90
Perceived ease of use 0.73** 0.52** 0.41** 0.84
Perceived usefulness 0.60** 0.63** 0.48** 0.59** 0.80
Behavioural intention 0.40** 0.47** 0.26** 0.45** 0.45** 0.89
Perceived effective use 0.43** 0.56** 0.36** 0.43** 0.54** 0.45** -
Mean (SD) 4.4 (0.7) 4.5 (0.8) 4.4 (0.7) 4.6 (0.8) 4.5 (0.8) 4.8 (0.8) 4.3 (1.0)
**P < 0.01. Diagonal elements are the square root of average variance extracted (AVE).

Table 3. Fit indices for the tested model.

Fit indices Recommended values Tested model
χ2/d.f. <5 4.758
GFI ≥ 0.9 0.980
AGFI ≥ 0.8 0.921
CFI ≥ 0.9 0.980
NFI ≥ 0.9 0.977
IFI ≥ 0.9 0.980
RMSEA ≤ 0.1 0.093
GFI, the goodness-of-fit index; AGFI, the adjusted goodness-of-fit index; CFI, the comparative fit index; NFI, the normed fit index, IFI,
the incremental fit index; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation.

= 0.28, p < 0.001), supporting hypothesis H5. Perceived enjoyment exerted a positive influence on
behavioral intention directly (β = 0.22, p < 0.001) (supporting hypothesis H8) and indirectly through
perceived usefulness (β = 0.43, p < 0.001) and perceived ease of use (β = 0.22, p < 0.001) (supporting
hypothesis H6 and H7). Perceived quality yielded a positive effect on perceived usefulness (β = 0.18, p
< 0.001) and perceived enjoyment (β = 0.28, p < 0.001), so that both hypothesis H9 and H10 were sup-
ported. Usability posited a positive effect on perceived ease of use (β = 0.65, p < 0.001), perceived
enjoyment (β = 0.33, p < 0.001) and perceived quality (β = 0.45, p < 0.001), supporting hypothesis
H11, H12 and H13, respectively.

Discussion
MOOCs have revolutionized learning by offering online educational services to massive users without
time and location limitations, and can be used as important supplementary tools for traditional

Figure 2. The final model and significant standardized path coefficients. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
 INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 9

Table 4. Results of hypothesis testing.

Hypotheses Path coefficient t-Value Supported?
H1 Behavioral intention→Perceived effective use 0.18*** 5.21 Yes
H2 Perceived usefulness→Perceived effective use 0.29*** 13.14 Yes
H3 Perceived usefulness→Behavioral intention 0.17** 3.72 Yes
H4 Perceived ease of use→Behavioral intention 0.23*** 5.53 Yes
H5 Perceived ease of use→Perceived usefulness 0.28*** 9.19 Yes
H6 Perceived enjoyment→Perceived usefulness 0.43*** 14.00 Yes
H7 Perceived enjoyment→Perceived ease of use 0.22*** 7.92 Yes
H8 Perceived enjoyment→Behavioral intention 0.22*** 4.98 Yes
H9 Perceived quality→Perceived usefulness 0.18*** 5.89 Yes
H10 Perceived quality→Perceived enjoyment 0.28*** 7.69 Yes
H11 Usability→Perceived ease of use 0.65*** 23.71 Yes
H12 Usability→Perceived enjoyment 0.33*** 9.00 Yes
H13 Usability→Perceived quality 0.45*** 12.91 Yes
**p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

classroom education to improve efficiency and quality of education. MOOCs also present a feasible
solution to the escalating cost of education, unevenly distributed resources, and the accessibility
problem in higher education. However, current applications of MOOCs are still limited, at least
partly due to their low user acceptance. For example, a number of MOOC applications have
dropout rates as much as 80–95% (Bartolomé & Steffens, 2015; Zhang et al., 2018). To address this
problem, our study proposed an extended TAM by incorporating three characteristics from interface
design (i.e. usability), content quality (i.e. perceived quality), and emotional arousal (i.e. perceived
enjoyment) of MOOCs into the model, and validated that they were key factors affecting user accep-
tance of MOOCs.

Primary findings
A contribution of this study is that it supports the use of TAM as an effective theoretical framework to
understand predictors of user acceptance of MOOCs. All the 13 research hypotheses were supported
(Table 4). For example, the predicting effects of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and per-
ceived enjoyment on behavioral intention, and predicting effects of perceived usefulness and behav-
ioral intention on perceived effective use were well supported by our study. The results are consistent
with the notion of TAM (Davis et al., 1989; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), and in line with the findings from
previous online learning (Agudo-Peregrina & Pascual-Miguel, 2014; Dečman, 2015; Mohammadi,
2015) and MOOC studies (Fianu et al., 2018; Hsu et al., 2018; Wu & Chen, 2016). The results strongly
suggest that users should be provided with MOOCs that are easy to use and useful in facilitating their
learning process. Efforts should also be put to ensure that the learning process with MOOCs should
be fun and enjoyable. In addition, the results also reveal the importance of perceived ease of use in
promoting user acceptance and usage through the mediating role of perceived usefulness.
This study tested the intention-behavior link, which is often taken for granted in many of previous
acceptance studies (Chen & Lin, 2018; Lee et al., 2015) but has not been put into questions until
recently. We found that there was a significant relation between behavioral intention and perceived
effective use of MOOCs, which confirms the validity of behavioral intention to be the agent of self-
reported usage. In addition, consistent with previous research (Diaz et al., 2002; Or et al., 2011), we
also found that perceived usefulness influenced perceived effective use directly. It means that stu-
dents who felt that MOOCs were useful for their learning could have greater usage tendency.
Thus, efforts to improve perceived usefulness of MOOCs would be able to directly promote MOOC
usage.
The present study made an important step to extend the TAM model with three key design
characteristics (i.e. perceived enjoyment, perceived quality and usability), and verified that they
were significant predictors of MOOC acceptance. First, perceived enjoyment was found to be a
10 D. TAO ET AL.

significant predictor of MOOC acceptance as it has both direct effects and indirect effects on behav-
ioral intention through the mediating roles of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. The
finding is consistent with previous studies on generic technology use (Ahn et al., 2007; Davis et al.,
1992; Heijden, 2004; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) and varied online learning innovations acceptance
(Balog & Pribeanu, 2010; Lee et al., 2005). For example, both Davis et al. (1992) and Lee et al.
(2005) considered perceived enjoyment as an intrinsic motivation factor and demonstrated that it
played a crucial role in explaining user acceptance and usage. It suggests that MOOCs users are
not purely utilitarian, valuing only usefulness and ease of use. They also care about whether the
usage experience with MOOCs is enjoyable or not, which in turn determine whether they would
return or not. In addition, our findings also indicate that perceived enjoyment is a stronger determi-
nant of behavioral intention to use MOOCs than perceived usefulness. A possible reason is that stu-
dents may consider MOOCs as a hedonic system apart from using the applications as a utilitarian
system for learning, as students nowadays are more likely to expect pleasurable and happy experi-
ence when they interact with new learning tools (Zhang, 2016). This appears to suggest that if the
technology is to provide hedonic value, not just utilitarian value, the importance of determinants
of user acceptance would changes. Similar results have been found in Ahn et al. study (Ahn et al.,
2007), where playfulness exerted a significant direct effect on behavioral intention to use online
retailing, while usefulness and ease of use did not.
Our results suggest that usability was a significant predictor to perceived ease of use, perceived
enjoyment and perceived quality. Usable MOOC interfaces that are visually appealing, well-struc-
tured, and easy to navigate are likely to induce students’ favorable perceptions that using the appli-
cation is easy and enjoyable, and the education services are of high quality. This finding mirrored the
evidence obtained from the use of other applications, such as health informatics applications (Lazard
et al., 2016; Tao et al., 2018) and internet banking (Aboobucker & Bao, 2018). For example, both
Lazard, et al. (Lazard et al., 2016) and Tao et al. (Tao et al., 2018) found that usability is a significant
anticedant of perceived ease of use for health information portals. Previous studies also consistently
showed that usability dimensions, such as visual aesthetics, contribute substantially to perceived
enjoyment in mobile commence and generic website portal contexts (Cyr, Head, & Ivanov, 2006;
Heijden, 2003; Sung & Yun, 2010). In addition, usability has long been regarded as a pre-requisite
for quality of use (Bevan, 1995), which validates its role in perceived quality.
Such interface design can be largely achieved through human factors design and usability evalu-
ation, where varied usability characteristics could be appropriately manipulated and configured
(Yousef, Chatti, Schroeder, & Wosnitza, 2015). In fact, the efforts to improve usability levels of
MOOC applications are especially helpful given that the structure and content of the applications
become increasingly complex, and that users may find difficulties in interacting with the applications.
Therefore, it is suggested that evaluating and ensuring usability levels could be a crucial aspect of the
business strategy in the whole life circle of MOOC applications.
Our study found that perceived quality contributed substantially to perceived usefulness and per-
ceived enjoyment. It appears that students decide on the usefulness of MOOCs based largely on
quality perceptions. They are more likely to be enjoyable in using MOOCs if they consider the
quality of MOOCs is high. Consistently, previous studies have identified that quality, either as an
overall construct, or represented by multiple subdimensions (e.g. system quality, service quality
and information quality), is an important factor in the formation of acceptance of online learning
systems through perceived usefulness and perceived enjoyment (Ahn et al., 2007; Calisir, Altin
Gumussoy, Bayraktaroglu, & Karaali, 2014; Roca, Chiu, & Martínez, 2006; Vijayasarathy, 2004; Wang
& Wang, 2009). For example, Calisir et al. found that a large portion of perceived usefulness of a
web-based learning system could be explained by perceived content quality of the system (Calisir
et al., 2014). Ahn et al. found that all of the three quality dimensions that they examined (including
system quality, service quality and information quality) contributed significantly to usefulness and
playfulness (a similar concept with enjoyment) (Ahn et al., 2007). The importance role of perceived
quality in MOOC acceptance also echoes the worldwide recognition that the quality of MOOCs is a
 INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 11

critical indicator and pre-requisite of the courses for effective learning (Margaryan, Bianco, & Little-
john, 2015). Therefore, MOOC designers should make endeavor to improve course quality in order
to promote user access to the courses.

Implications
Our findings provide important implications on the design and implementation of MOOCs for course
designers, and managers. First, acceptance of MOOCs depends on several design characteristics (use-
fulness, ease of use, and enjoyment) that are able to reinforce users’ behavioral intention to use
MOOCs. To boost MOOC acceptance, managers should consider what users use MOOCs for,
convey the benefits of using MOOCs for learning over traditional classroom courses to users, and
then design MOOCs in a way to create ease-of-use interfaces and hedonic feelings in the learning
process. In particular, ease-of-use interfaces can improve users’ comprehension of the content and
structure of MOOC applications, and offers comfortable user experience for users. In addition,
MOOC designers should make good use of games, interesting quizzes, and other creative toolkits
to create more fun for users in their use of MOOCs.
Our finding that greater usability leads to higher levels of ease of use and enjoyment from MOOC
applications suggests that usability evaluation should be a crucial aspect of the business strategy in
the development of MOOC applications. The efforts to improve the usability of MOOC applications
are especially helpful due to the growing complexity of the applications and difficulties that users
encounter in using them. Specifically, usable MOOC applications can be achieved through human
factors design and usability evaluation, where varied usability characteristics could be appropriately
manipulated and configured (Or & Tao, 2012; Yousef et al., 2015). Therefore, it is suggested that eval-
uating and ensuring usability levels could be a crucial aspect of the business strategy in the whole life
circle of MOOC applications, and that usability should be one of the major design objectives for
MOOC applications.
Perceived quality is a significant precursor of enjoyment and usefulness. Thus, to create high-
quality MOOCs, designers could establish quality evaluation system to ensure the quality of edu-
cational services presented in MOOC applications and make the quality evaluation results visible
for users. This could be achieved by tagging some courses with high quality by the quality assurance
system. Another way to ensure high quality could be to invite instructors with high reputation to
produce their online courses. Such quality evaluation mechanism is likely to create trust and authen-
ticity to the source and content of the educational services in MOOCs, and thus, to promote users’
quality perceptions regarding the applications.

Limitations and future research

Several limitations need to be noted. First, our sample included only college students. This may raise
concerns about the generalizability of our findings, as there are indeed a number of users outside
university campuses. Recruitment of diverse samples could possibly address this limitation.
Second, the model explained 48% of behavioral intention and 28% of perceived effective use.
Thus, a considerable percentage of the variables remain unexplained, warranting the need for
further research to explore more factors that potentially affect user beliefs and acceptance. Finally,
it is difficult to guarantee that the established relationships from cross-sectional survey in our and
previous studies (Agudo-Peregrina & Pascual-Miguel, 2014; Calisir et al., 2014; Dečman, 2015; Moham-
madi, 2015; Roca et al., 2006; Wang & Wang, 2009; Wu & Chen, 2016) would remain the same over
time. In practice, user perceptions of technology could change. Therefore, longitudinal studies are
recommended to examine possible changing roles of predictors in user acceptance of MOOCs,
which may help with explanation of continuance intention and facilitate future implementation of
the applications.
12 D. TAO ET AL.

Conclusions
This study contributes to the understanding of acceptance of MOOC applications among college stu-
dents. We examined several logically related application characteristics by integrating them within
the well-known TAM. The findings demonstrate that perceived enjoyment, usability and perceived
quality functioned as significant explanatory variables for MOOC acceptance and help improve our
understanding of how the MOOC application characteristics are valued by students for their accep-
tance. MOOC managers could base future actionable design and operation strategies around the
findings. Future studies could also extend our research with a diverse sample and examine the con-
tinuance of user acceptance for improved design and operation strategies for MOOC applications.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [grant number
2019A1515010863]; Natural Science Foundation of Shenzhen University [grant number 827000228 and 827000033]; Edu-
cational Reform Research Program of Shenzhen University [grant number JG2017070].

Notes on contributors
Da Tao is an assistant professor in the Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics at Shenzhen University. He has a Ph.D.
in human–computer interaction from The University of Hong Kong. His research interests lie in the social, technical and
governance applications of information technology.
Pei Fu is an assistant lecturer in the Department of Management Engineering, Hunan Construction Technical College. Her
research interests lie in engineering education and MOOC applications.
Yunhui Wang is an assistant lecturer in the School of Information Engineering, Heilongjiang Forestry Vocation-Technical
College. Her research interests include engineering education, online learning and art design.
Tingru Zhang is an assistant professor in the Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics at Shenzhen University. She has
a Ph.D. in human factors from City University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include human factors and its appli-
cations in information technology.
Xingda Qu is a professor in the Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics at Shenzhen University. He has a Ph.D. in
human factors from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. His research interests include human factors
and its applications in information technology.

References
Aboobucker, I., & Bao, Y. (2018). What obstruct customer acceptance of internet banking? Security and privacy, risk, trust
and website usability and the role of moderators. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 29(1),
109–123.
Agudo-Peregrina, A. F. N., & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of elec-
tronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 34
(15), 301–314.
Ahn, T., Ryu, S., & Han, I. (2004). The impact of the online and offline features on the user acceptance of internet shopping
malls. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 3(4), 405–420.
Ahn, T., Ryu, S., & Han, I. (2007). The impact of Web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing.
Information & Management, 44(3), 263–275.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Balog, A., & Pribeanu, C. (2010). The role of perceived enjoyment in the students’ acceptance of an augmented reality
teaching platform: A structural equation modelling approach. Studies in Informatics & Control, 19(3), 319–330.
Bartolomé, A., & Steffens, K. (2015). Are MOOCs promising learning environments? Comunicar, 22(44), 91–99.
Belanche, D., Casaló, L. V., & Guinalíu, M. (2012). Website usability, consumer satisfaction and the intention to use a
website: The moderating effect of perceived risk. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 19(1), 124–132.
 INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS 13

Bevan, N. (1995). Measuring usability as quality of use. Software Quality Journal, 4(2), 115–130.
Calisir, F., Altin Gumussoy, C., Bayraktaroglu, A. E., & Karaali, D. (2014). Predicting the intention to use a web-based learn-
ing system: Perceived content quality, anxiety, perceived system quality, image, and the technology acceptance
model. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 24(5), 515–531.
Calisir, F., & Calisir, F. (2004). The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of
use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4),
505–515.
Chen, C. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2018). What drives live-stream usage intention? The perspectives of flow, entertainment, social
interaction, and endorsement. Telematics & Informatics, 35(1), 293–303.
Chen, L.-D., & Tan, J. (2004). Technology adaptation in e-commerce: Key determinants of virtual stores acceptance.
European Management Journal, 22(1), 74–86.
Chen, X., Tao, D., & Zhou, Z. (2019). Factors affecting reposting behaviour using a mobile phone-based user-generated-
content online community application among Chinese young adults. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(2),
120–131.
Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behav-
ior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535.
Cyr, D., Head, M., & Ivanov, A. (2006). Design aesthetics leading to m-loyalty in mobile commerce. Information &
Management, 43(8), 950–963.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theor-
etical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132.
Dečman, M. (2015). Modeling the acceptance of e-learning in mandatory environments of higher education: The
influence of previous education and gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 272–281.
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Diaz, J. A., Griffith, R. A., Ng, J. J., Reinert, S. E., Friedmann, P. D., & Moulton, A. W. (2002). Patients’ use of the internet for
medical information. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 17(3), 180–185.
Douneva, M., Jaron, R., & Thielsch, M. T. (2016). Effects of different website designs on first impressions, aesthetic judge-
ments and memory performance after short presentation. Interacting with Computers, 28(4), 552–567.
Estebanmillat, I., Martínezlópez, F. J., Pujoljover, M., Gázquezabad, J. C., & Alegret, A. (2018). An extension of the technol-
ogy acceptance model for online learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 1, 1–16.
Fianu, E., Blewett, C., Ampong, G., & Ofori, K. (2018). Factors affecting MOOC usage by students in selected Ghanaian uni-
versities. Education Sciences, 8(2), 70.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement
error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.
Green, D. T., & Pearson, J. M. (2011). Integrating website usability with the electronic commerce acceptance model.
Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(2), 181–199.
Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
Hazzenzahl, M. (2004). The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Human-Computer
Interaction, 19(4), 319–349.
Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704.
Heijden, H. V. D. (2003). Factors influencing the usage of websites: The case of a generic portal in The Netherlands.
Information & Management, 40(6), 541–549.
Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B. T. (2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. Journal of
Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), 159–172.
Hsiao, K. L., & Chen, C. C. (2018). What drives smartwatch purchase intention? Perspectives from hardware, software,
design, and value. Telematics & Informatics, 35, 103–113.
Hsu, J. Y., Chen, C. C., & Ting, P. F. (2018). Understanding MOOC continuance: An empirical examination of social support
theory. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(8), 1100–1118.
ISO 9241-11. (1998). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) – Part 11: Guidance on
usability. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
Jung, Y., & Lee, J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Computers &
Education, 122, 9–22.
Kahl, M. P. (2015). An overview of the world of MOOCs. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174(1), 427–433.
Kizilcec, R. F., Saltarelli, A. J., Reich, J., & Cohen, G. L. (2017). Closing global achievement gaps in MOOCs. Science, 355
(6322), 251.
Lazard, A. J., Watkins, I., Mackert, M. S., Xie, B., Stephens, K. K., & Shalev, H. (2016). Design simplicity influences patient
portal use: The role of aesthetic evaluations for technology acceptance. Journal of the American Medical Informatics
Association, 23, e157–e161.
14 D. TAO ET AL.

Lee, M. K. O., Cheung, C. M. K., & Chen, Z. (2005). Acceptance of internet-based learning medium: The role of extrinsic and
intrinsic motivation. Information & Management, 42(8), 1095–1104.
Lee, D., Moon, J., Kim, Y. J., & Yi, M. Y. (2015). Antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usability: Linking simplicity
and interactivity to satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty. Information & Management, 52(3), 295–304.
Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of Massive Open online courses (MOOCs).
Computers & Education, 80, 77–83.
Martins, L. L., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2004). A model of business school students’ acceptance of a web-based course man-
agement system. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 7–26.
Mendoza, G. A. G., Jung, I., & Kobayashi, S. (2017). A review of empirical studies on MOOC adoption: Applying the unified
theory of acceptance and use of technology. International Journal for Educational Media and Technology, 11(1), 15–24.
Mohammadi, H. (2015). Factors affecting the e-learning outcomes: An integration of TAM and IS success model.
Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 701–719.
Or, C. K., Karsh, B. T., Severtson, D. J., Burke, L. J., Brown, R. L., & Brennan, P. F. (2011). Factors affecting home care patients’
acceptance of a web-based interactive self-management technology. Journal of the American Medical Informatics
Association, 18(1), 51–59.
Or, C., & Tao, D. (2012). Usability study of a computer-based self-management system for older adults with chronic dis-
eases. JMIR Research Protocols, 1, e13.
Roca, J. C., Chiu, C.-M., & Martínez, F. J. (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the tech-
nology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(8), 683–696.
Russ, A. L., Zillich, A. J., Melton, B. L., Russell, S. A., Chen, S., Spina, J. R., … Saleem, J. J. (2014). Applying human factors
principles to alert design increases efficiency and reduces prescribing errors in a scenario-based simulation. Journal
of the American Medical Informatics Association, 21(e2), e287–e296.
Schaik, P. V., & Ling, J. (2011). An integrated model of interaction experience for information retrieval in a Web-based
encyclopaedia. Interacting with Computers, 23(1), 18–32.
Šumak, B., HeričKo, M., & Pušnik, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types
and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2067–2077.
Sung, J., & Yun, Y. (2010). Toward a more robust usability concept with perceived enjoyment in the context of mobile
multimedia service. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 1(2), 12–32.
Tao, D., Wang, T., Wang, T., Zhang, T., Zhang, X., & Qu, X. (2020). A systematic review and meta-analysis of user acceptance
of consumer-oriented health information technologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106147.
Tao, D., Yuan, J., Shao, F., Li, D., Zhou, Q., & Qu, X. (2018). Factors affecting consumer acceptance of an online health infor-
mation portal among young internet users. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 36(11), 530–539.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field
studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified
view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
Venkatesh, V., Speier, C., & Morris, M. G. (2002). User acceptance enablers in individual decision making about technology:
Toward an integrated model. Decision Sciences, 33(2), 297–316.
Vijayasarathy, L. R. (2004). Predicting consumer intentions to use on-line shopping: The case for an augmented technol-
ogy acceptance model. Information & Management, 41(6), 747–762.
Wang, W.-T., & Wang, C.-C. (2009). An empirical study of instructor adoption of web-based learning systems. Computers &
Education, 53(3), 761–774.
Wei, H.-C., Peng, H., & Chou, C. (2015). Can more interactivity improve learning achievement in an online course? Effects of
college students’ perception and actual use of a course-management system on their learning achievement.
Computers & Education, 83, 10–21.
Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2016). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and
task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232.
Yousef, A. M. F., Chatti, M. A., Schroeder, U., & Wosnitza, M. (2015). A usability evaluation of a blended MOOC environment:
An experimental case study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2), 69–93.
Zhang, J. (2016). Can MOOCs be interesting to students? An experimental investigation from regulatory focus perspec-
tive. Computers & Education, 95, 340–351.
Zhang, C., Chen, H., Phang, C. W., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Role of instructors’ forum interactions with students in promoting
MOOC continuance. Journal of Global Information Management, 26(3), 105–120.
Zhang, T., Tao, D., Qu, X., Zhang, X., Lin, R., & Zhang, W. (2019). The roles of initial trust and perceived risk in public’s accep-
tance of automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 98, 207–220.
Zhou, M. (2016). Chinese university students’ acceptance of MOOCs: A self-determination perspective. Computers &
Education, 92–93, 194–203.