See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348047664

Behavioral Intention to Use Online Learning During COVID-19: An Analysis of

the Technology Acceptance Model

Conference Paper · December 2020

CITATIONS READS

12 2,116

4 authors, including:

Shamim Ahmed Khan Mohammad Zainuddin

Monash University (Malaysia) Australian National University
11 PUBLICATIONS   23 CITATIONS    23 PUBLICATIONS   65 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ishtiaque Arif
Universiti Putra Malaysia
19 PUBLICATIONS   472 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Microfinance View project

Measuring Revisit Intention of Tourists' for Destination Bangladesh View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Zainuddin on 01 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Behavioral Intention to Use Online Learning During COVID-19:
An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model

Shamim Ahmed Khan

School of Business, Monash University Malaysia
shamim.khan@monash.edu

Mohammad Zainuddin
Putra Business School, Universiti Putra Malaysia
mohammad.msc_hp17@grad.putrabs.edu.my

Masnun Mahi
Faculty of Business and Accountancy, University of Malaya
masnunmahi@um.edu.my

Ishtiaque Arif
Putra Business School, Universiti Putra Malaysia
ishtiaque.phd_mkt18@grad.putrabs.edu.my

December 2020

This paper was presented at the International Conference on Innovative Methods of Teaching and
Technological Advancements in Higher Education at European University, Georgia on December 15, 2020.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

I International Conference on Innovative Methods of Teaching and
Technological Advancements in Higher Education
IMTTAHE 2020

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

Behavioral Intention to Use Online Learning During COVID-19:

An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model

Shamim Ahmed Khan

School of Business, Monash University Malaysia, Bandar Sunway, Malaysia
Email: shamim.khan@monash.edu

Mohammad Zainuddin
Putra Business School, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
Email: mohammad.msc_hp17@grad.putrabs.edu.my

Masnun Mahi
Faculty of Business and Accountancy, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Email: masnunmahi@um.edu.my

Ishtiaque Arif
Putra Business School, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
Email: ishtiaque.phd_mkt18@grad.putrabs.edu.my

Abstract
Due to COVID-19 pandemic, the conventional face-to-face classroom lectures have shifted to online
setting. By applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this study investigates the factors
affecting university students’ behavioral intention to use online learning for formal educational
purposes. Specifically, the study examines the effects of two external factors namely, technological
competency and subjective norm on two TAM constructs: perceived ease of use and perceived
usefulness. In addition, the present study examines the effects of perceived ease of use and perceived
usefulness on behavioral intention to use online learning. With an online-based survey using a
structured questionnaire, this study collects data from 200 university students residing in Bangladesh
and Malaysia. After applying structural equation modeling (SEM) technique for data analysis, results
related to external factors reveal that technological competency has significant positive impact on
perceived ease of use, whereas subjective norm positively and significantly affects both perceived
ease of use and perceived usefulness. Furthermore, with regards to the core variables of TAM,
perceived ease of use significantly and positively impacts perceived usefulness. Finally, both perceived
ease of use and perceived usefulness have significant positive effects on behavioral intention to use
online learning among Bangladeshi and Malaysian university students during the pandemic. Findings
of the current study establish the importance of social and technological factors on online learning
acceptance which can have significant implications not only for future researchers but also for
policymakers and practitioners in designing an effective online learning system for educational
institutions.

Keywords: online learning, behavioral intention, Technology Acceptance Model, Structural Equation
Modeling, Bangladesh, Malaysia, COVID-19

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

1. Introduction
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, governments around the world have closed all the educational
institutions to control the spread of the virus, and as a result, over 1.2 billion children are out of the
classroom globally (Chandra, 2020; Li & Lalani, 2020). The sudden shift from the physical classroom to
virtual space creates a disruption among students, educators, and institutions (Chandra, 2020). Under
this ‘new normal’ world scenario, online learning has been a necessity rather than an option to
continue the learning activities. Even though online learning has experienced an unprecedented rise,
several arguments are associated with online learning; concerns are related to accessibility,
affordability, flexibility, learning pedagogy, life-long learning, and policy (Dhawan, 2020). Students
often have different background characteristics in terms of gender, age, academic discipline, and prior
education, which contribute not only to their preference for an online course format but also to their
success in any academic setting (Dumford & Miller, 2018; Richardson, Morgan, & Woodley, 1999). Yet,
many institutions, including universities, are necessarily conducting classes online during the current
COVID-19 pandemic.
Against this backdrop, the factors that affect university students’ behavioral intention to use online
learning for formal educational purposes are thus worthy of study. Although this area has been
explored by previous researchers, there are studies that report conflicting findings in terms of a
number of facilitating factors that demand further rigorous empirical investigation. Furthermore,
examining the students’ behavioral intention process of adopting online learning during pandemics
like COVID-19 has not been investigated thoroughly. The purpose of this paper is thus to examine
factors predicting behavioral intention to adopt online learning during COVID-19 among university
students in Bangladesh and Malaysia.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the existing literatures with regard to
online learning and associated variables. This section also proposes the conceptual model for the
study. Section 3 details the methodology, and the next section discusses the data analysis with findings
in detail. Finally, section 5 concludes.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Online learning and COVID-19
Since the outbreak of COVID-19, educational institutions of the affected countries across the globe
have stopped taking classes physically and shifted to online mode in order to contain the spread of
the virus. Although different forms of online learning have been there in the scenario for quite some
time, the current situation of a full-scale online learning can have certain consequences. Previous
studies suggest that full scale online learning has higher dropout rates than physical or face-to-face
modes of learning (McArdle G, Bertolotto, 2012). To avoid possible complications, Burgos et al. (2007)
recommend to make necessary adjustments before implementing online learning. These arguments
indicate that a number of external factors and facilitating conditions are important in adoption process
of online learning.
2.2 Online learning and TAM
Proposed by Davis (1986, 1989, 1993), the TAM helps to explain the behavioral intention process of
adopting or refusing a particular technology. The model identifies two key factors, viz., perceived
usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) that predict a person’s behavioral intention (BI) to
use a technology. Perceived usefulness refers to the user’s belief that the new technology will be
useful to him/her or will improve the performance, whereas perceived ease of use means that the
user believes that the new technology will be easy to use or will be free of effort (Davis, 1989). Previous
studies have used TAM in investigating online learning acceptance among students (Arbaugh, 2002;
Gao, 2005; Pituch & Lee, 2006). However, despite being proven as a robust model in predicting
acceptance of technology (Abdullah et al., 2016), a number of external factors are also proposed apart

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

from the key constructs of the model in order to accompany the original version of TAM (Abdullah &
Ward, 2016; Mohammadi, 2015; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).
2.3 The proposed model
PEOU and PU are the core variables of TAM that predict the user’s BI to use a technology (Chen et al.,
2013; Tarhini et al., 2014). Previous studies have found direct relationships between PU and BI and
between PEOU and BI (Davis, 1989; Davis et al., 1989; Lin et al., 2011). As per the original TAM, there
is also a direct relationship between PEOU and PU which is also validated by other studies (Venkatesh
& Davis, 2000). Apart from the core TAM constructs, to improve the predictive capacity of technology
acceptance intention, a number of external factors can play crucial roles (Venkatesh & Davis, 1996).
As such, different external factors have been incorporated in TAM over the years to better gauge the
behavioral intention.
Subjective norm (SN) is one of such external constructs which refers to a person’s perceived social
pressure to perform or not to perform the behavior in question (Ajzen, 1991). In the context of online
learning, SN is defined as a student’s perception of pressure from members of his/her environment to
use online learning (Aguda-Peregrina, Hernandez-Garcia, & Pascual-Miguel, 2014). Most of the
previous studies show significant positive relationship between SN and PU (Karaali, Gumussoy, &
Calisir, 2011; Rejon-Guardia, Sanchez-Fernandez, & Munoz-Leiva, 2013) and between SN and PEOU
(Motaghian et al., 2013). Apart from SN, present study investigates the effect of another individual
external factor which is technological competency (TC). It is postulated that having competency in
technological aspects can be a facilitating factor that can positively influence perceived ease of use
(PEOU) of online learning. Based on the above discussions, the following hypotheses are developed:
H1: TC has significant positive impact on PEOU H4: PEOU has significant positive impact on PU
H2: SN significantly and positively impacts PU H5: PEOU has significant positive impact on BI
H3: SN significantly and positively impacts PEOU H6: PU significantly and positively impacts BI

External Variables Original Technology Acceptance Model

Subjective H2 Perceived
Norm (SN) Usefulness (PU) H6

Behavioral
H3 Intention to Use
H4 Online Learning
(BI)
Tech H1 Perceived Ease H5
Competency
of Use (PEOU)
(TC)

Figure 1: The proposed conceptual model

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

3. Methodology
3.1 Participants and data collection procedure
Data for the present study were collected from different private and public university students of
Bangladesh and Malaysia. A structured survey questionnaire was used and data were collected via
online. The questionnaire was developed and circulated by using Google forms service. Combination
of purposive and snowball sampling technique was used and samples were selected based on prior
online learning experience; either before or during COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 223 responses were
received but based on the screening question result, 200 responses were retained for further analysis.
Table 1 outlines demographic characteristics of the respondents.
Table 1: Demographic Profile of the Respondents
Constructs Categories n %
Age 18 Years or Below 10 5.0
19 -24 Years 112 56.0
25-30 Years 34 17.0
31-39 Years 26 13.0
40 Years or Above 18 9.0
Location Bangladesh 130 65.0
Malaysia 70 35.0
Gender Male 71 35.5
Female 129 64.5
Education Undergraduate/Honors 114 57.0
Masters 58 29.0
PhD 28 14.0
Institution Type Government/Public Institute 151 75.5
Private Institute 49 24.5
Monthly Household Income Less than BDT15,000/Less than RM2,500 39 19.5
BDT15,001-BDT30,099/RM2,500-RM4,849 61 30.5
BDT31,000-BDT64,999/RM4,850-RM7,099 34 17.0
BDT65,000-BDT99,999/RM7,100-RM10,959 33 16.5
BDT100,000 or more/RM10,960 or more 33 16.5

A total of 22 items were used to measure the latent constructs of the study. Perceived ease of use was
measured with 6 items and perceived usefulness was measured with 6 items and both were adapted
from Davis (1989). Subjective norm was measured with 2 items adapted from Venkatesh and Davis
(2000). 5 items were adapted from Selim (2007) to measure technological competency. Finally, 3 items
were adapted from Venkatesh and Davis (2000) and Pavlou (2003) to measure behavioral intention to
use online learning. All the items were measured with seven-point Likert scale ranging from “1=
strongly disagree” to “7 = strongly agree”.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

3.2 Data analysis

For data analysis, structural equation modelling (SEM) was used. SPSS and AMOS version 23 were used
to facilitate data analysis. Data were screened for missing values and outliers. The validation of the
measurement model was examined by performing confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Model fit for
both measurement model and structural model were examined using several goodness-of-fit indices
such as Chi Square/ Degrees of Freedom (Chisq/df), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and standardized root
mean square residual (SRMR). According to Hu and Bentler (1999), CFI ≥ .90, and SRMR ≤ .08 ensures
an acceptable model fit. Furthermore, according to Hair et al. (2018), Chisq/df should be less than 3.
These thresholds were used to validate the measurement and structural models of the present study.
As suggested by Hair et al. (2018), RMSEA is not suitable to use in small sample size studies (n<500).
Therefore, considering the sample size of the present study, RMSEA was not used.
4. Results
4.1 Measurement model
The initial measurement model with 22 items showed a poor model fit (χ2 (199) = 542.11, p < .01, CFI
= .883, SRMR = .0774). To improve the model fit, items with low factor loadings were removed from
the model. Hair et al. (2018) suggested factor loading of 0.70 or above as idea threshold. Thus, 3 items
with factor loading of less than 0.70 were removed from the model. The modified model showed
acceptable model fit (χ2 (142) = 333.13, p < .01, CFI = .925, SRMR = .055). In addition, reliability analysis
of the final scales using Cronbach’s alpha reveals that values for all the constructs range from 0.770
to 0.914; which is higher than the commonly accepted cut-off point of 0.70. Table 2 outlines the fit
indices as well as descriptive statistics, bivariate correlation analysis, and reliability statistics of the
final scales.
Table 2: Descriptive statistics, reliabilities, correlation matrix and model fit
Constructs Mean SD α 1 2 3 4 5
(n=200)
1. Technological Competency 5.35 1.36 .770 1
2. Perceived Ease of Use 4.70 1.41 .914 .523** 1
3. Perceived Usefulness 4.25 1.52 .904 .314** .764** 1
4. Subjective Norm 4.40 1.61 .866 .337** .591** .577** 1
5. Behavioral Intention 4.87 1.40 .835 .396** .724** .687** .537** 1
χ2 = 333.13; df = 142; CFI: .925; SRMR= .055
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level; α=Cronbach’s alpha

In addition to Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability (CR) was calculated to ensure the internal
consistency of the items of final measurement model. CR value of 0.7 or above is considered good
(Hair et al. 2018). Result of CR calculation shows that all the CR values range from 0.772 to 0.914,
confirming sufficient internal consistency of the measurement items. To measure the convergent
validity of the measurement model, average variance extracted (AVE) was calculated. An ideal cut-off
point for AVE is 0.50 or above. Result of AVE calculation reveals that all the AVE values range from
.530 to .764, thus ensuring convergent validity. Factor loading of 0.70 for all the items is another
assurance of sufficient convergent validity. Table 3 outlines the factor loadings, AVE and CR values for
all the constructs. Furthermore, discriminant validity was tested using Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio
(HTMT) method. As per Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2015), HTMT value less than 0.85 establishes

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

discriminant validity. As outlined in Table 4, no values exceeded the cut-off point of 0.85; thus,
confirming discriminant validity of the constructs.
Table 3: Factor Loading, AVE and CR
Constructs Items Factor AVE CR
Loading
TC1 .710
1. Technological Competency TC2 .753 .530 .772
TC3 .720
PEOU1 .760
PEOU2 .806
2. Perceived Ease of Use PEOU3 .787 .612 .904
PEOU4 .766
PEOU5 .801
PEOU6 .771
PU2 .792
PU3 .834
3. Perceived Usefulness PU4 .855 .684 .915
PU5 .829
PU6 .823
SN1 .861
4. Subjective Norm .764 .867
SN2 .887
BI1 .757
5. Behavioral Intention BI2 .816 .634 .840
BI3 .815

Table 4: Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).

Constructs TC PEOU PU SN BI
Technological Competency (TC)
Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) 0.63
Perceived Usefulness (PU) 0.37 0.84
Subjective Norm (SN) 0.41 0.67 0.65
Behavioral Intention (BI) 0.49 0.83 0.79 0.63

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

4.2 Structural model

To test the hypothesis of the study, a structural model with Maximum Likelihood was run. Similar to
the measurement model, the structural model also showed acceptable fit ((χ2 (145) = 346.57, p < .01,
CFI = .921, SRMR = .055). R2 of behavioral intention is found as 0.72 which implies that the two TAM
constructs namely perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness can explain 72% of total variance
in student’s intention to use online learning. Table 5 outlines the summary of the findings from
hypothesis testing. As outlined in the Table 5, based on previous literature, all the hypothesized
relationships were supported. Implications of the findings are discussed in the following section.
Table 5: Summary of Hypothesis testing
Path Estimate P-Value Decision
H1: Technological Competency  Perceived Ease of Use 0.465 *** Supported
H2: Subjective Norm  Perceived Usefulness 0.179 0.026 Supported
H3: Subjective Norm  Perceived Ease of Use 0.485 *** Supported
H4: Perceived Ease of Use  Perceived Usefulness 0.799 *** Supported
H5: Perceived Ease of Use  Behavioral Intention 0.556 *** Supported
H6: Perceived Usefulness  Behavioral Intention 0.251 0.016 Supported

Figure 2: Structural Model (Standardized Estimates)

*TCOM-Technological Competency; SNRM- Subjective Norm; PEOUS- Perceived Ease of Use; PUSE-
Perceived Usefulness; INT- Behavioral Intention to Use Online Learning

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

5. Conclusions
Findings of the study confirm the significant relationships among core variables of original TAM, viz.,
perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU) and behavioral intention (BI). PEOU is a
significant predictor of PU, and both PU and PEU positively and significantly influence BI. The study
also reports significant relationships between external factors and perceived usefulness of online
learning and between external factors and perceived ease of use of such learning. It is found that SN
and TC significantly and positively influence the university students’ perception in ease of use of online
learning. In addition, SN also significantly impacts perceived usefulness. Overall, the results show that
the TAM-based proposed model successfully explains factors predicting behavioral intention to use
online learning among Bangladeshi and Malaysian university students during the pandemic. Findings
of the study reveal that external factors SN and TC are important to consider in designing an effective
online learning system and thus, educators and policymakers must carefully consider these social as
well as technical factors while planning for full-scale deployment of online learning.
This study however has some limitations that future studies can capitalize on. Respondents involved
in this study are only from higher educational institutions from Bangladesh and Malaysia; therefore,
more respondents with different levels of education as well as from different national and cultural
backgrounds are needed for future research. The researchers of this study collect data within a short
period of time and the study is cross-sectional in nature. Since users’ perception of usefulness and
ease of use of online learning may vary over time (Ching-Ter et. al., 2017), a longitudinal study is
recommended.

References
Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for E-
learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human
Behavior, 56, 238-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036.
Abdullah, F., Ward, R., & Ahmed, E. (2016). 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. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 75-90.
Aguda-Peregrina, A.F., Hernadez-Garcia, A and Pascual-Miguel, F.J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use
behaviour and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher
education and lifelong learning. Computer in Human Behaviour, 34, 301-314
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision
processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2002). Managing the on-line classroom: a study of technological and behavioral
characteristics of web-based MBA courses. Journal of High Technology Management
Research, 13, 203–223.
Burgos, D., Tattersall, C., & Koper, R. (2007). How to represent adaptation in e-learning with IMS
learning design. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(2), 161-170.
Chandra, Y. (2020). Online education during COVID-19: perception of academic stress and emotional
intelligence coping strategies among college students. Asian Education and Development
Studies. doi: 10.1108/AEDS-05-2020-0097
Chen, Y., Lin, Y., Yeh, R., & Lou, S. (2013). Examining factors affecting college students’ intention to
use web-based instruction systems: towards an integrated model. Turkish Online Journal of

10

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

Educational Technology-TOJET, 12(2), 111-121. Retrieved from:

https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Ching-Ter C., Su C.-R. & Hajiyev J. (2017). Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-
learning in Azerbaijan? The General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for Elearning
approach, Computers & Education. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.04.010.
Davis, F. D. (1986). Technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information
systems: Theory and results. MA, USA: Massachussetts Institute of Technology.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–339.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user
perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man–Machine Studies, 38, 475–
487.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A
comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982–1003.
Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational
Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22.
Dumford, A. D., & Miller, A. L. (2018). Online learning in higher education: exploring advantages and
disadvantages for engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(3), 452-465.
Gao, Y. (2005). Applying the technology acceptance model to educational hypermedia: A field study.
Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 14(3), 237–247.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2018). Multivariate data analysis. Cengage.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant
validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing
science, 43(1), 115-135.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a
multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Karaali, D., Gumussoy, C. A., & Calisir, F. (2011). Factors affecting the intention to use a webbased
learning system among blue-collar workers in the automotive industry. Computers in Human
Behavior, 27(1), 343-354. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Li, C., & Lalani, F. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever. This is how. Paper
presented at the World economic forum.
Lin, F., Fofanah, S. S., & Liang, D. (2011). Assessing citizen adoption of e-Government initiatives in
Gambia: A validation of the technology acceptance model in information systems success,
Government Information Quarterly, 28, 271-279.
McArdle, G., & Bertolotto, M. (2012). Assessing the application of three-dimensional collaborative
technologies within an e-learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(1), 57-
75.
Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS
success model. Computers in human behavior, 45, 359-374.

11

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

 Khan, Zainuddin, Mahi, Arif IMTTAHE 2020

Motaghian, H., Hassanzadeh, A., & Moghadam, D. K. (2013). Factors affecting university instructors’
adoption of web-based learning systems: case study of Iran. Computers & Education, 61, 158-
167. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the
technology acceptance model. International journal of electronic commerce, 7(3), 101-134.
Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers
and Education, 47, 222–244.
Rejon-Guardia, F., Sanchez-Fern_andez, J., & Munoz-Leiva, F. (2013). The acceptance of microblogging
in the learning process: the mBAM model. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 3(1),
31-47. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Richardson, J. T., Morgan, A., & Woodley, A. (1999). Approaches to studying in distance education.
Higher Education, 37(1), 23-55.
Selim, H. M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor
models. Computers & education, 49(2), 396-413.
Tarhini, A., Hone, K., & Liu, X. (2014). The effects of individual differences on e-learning users’ behavior
in developing countries: a structural equation model. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 153-
163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.020.
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on
interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
5915.2008.00192.x.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use:
Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451–481.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model:
Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186-204.

12

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3756886

View publication stats