Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu

Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-

learning in Azerbaijan? The General Extended Technology
Acceptance Model for E-learning approach
Ching-Ter Chang a, b, c, Jeyhun Hajiyev a, *, Chia-Rong Su a
a
Department of Information Management, Chang Gung University 259 Wen-Hwa 1st Road, Kwei-Shan Tao-Yuan, Taiwan, R.O.C
b
Department of Thoracic Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C
c
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ming Chi University of Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 19 December 2016
Received in revised form 10 April 2017
Accepted 13 April 2017
Available online 18 April 2017
Keywords:
Country-specific developments
Interactive learning environments
Teaching/learning strategies
Azerbaijan has successfully incorporated modern Information Communication Technolo-
gies (ICT) in the education system. The major goal is to raise the standard of education. The
factors that affect university students' behavioral intention (BI) to use e-learning for
educational purposes in Azerbaijan are worthy of study. This is an empirical study of the
use of the General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-learning (GETAMEL)
developed by Abdullah and Ward (2016) in order to determine the factors that affect
undergraduate students' BI to use an e-learning system. The data was collected from 714
undergraduate and masters students using a convenient sampling technique and the re-
sponses were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). It is seen that the
Subjective norm (SN), Experience (EXP) and Enjoyment (ENJOY) positively and signifi-
cantly influence students' perceived usefulness (PU) of e-learning, while Computer anxiety
(CA) has a negatively effect. EXP, ENJOY and Self-efficacy (SE) positively and significantly
affect their perceived ease of use (PEOU) of e-learning. It is also seen that SN has a positive
and significant impact on BI to use e-learning, while Technological innovation (TI)
significantly moderates the relationship between SN and PU, PU and BI to use e-learning.
This study is the first to determine a negative and significant relationship between CA and
PU, in the context of students’ e-learning. This study is also one of the very few that uses
the GETAMEL model for e-learning settings. The results have significant practical impli-
cations for educational institutions and decision-makers, in terms of the design of the e-
learning system in universities.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The rapid evolution of information technology have created new applications, such as e-banking, e-commence, e-learning
and e-health (Alsabawy, Cater-Steel, & Soar, 2016). E-learning is a common application that is widely used in the educational
sector (Islam, 2016). The main objective of ICT is to reduce the limitations on time and location, in the context of higher
education. It allows access to desired information, without limitations (Althunibat, 2015).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: chingter@mail.cgu.edu.tw (C.-T. Chang), ceyhunhajiyev@gmail.com (J. Hajiyev), sugathomas@gmail.com (C.-R. Su).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.04.010
0360-1315/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 129

The Ministry of Education of Azerbaijan implemented the State Programs for “Provision of ICT for Education” in
2005e2007 and for “Informatization of the Educational System” in 2008e2012 (Muradkhanli & Atabeyli, 2012). E-learning
centers were launched in several universities, in order to support learners in the e-learning process. Three universities -
Khazar University, Azerbaijan Tourism University and Qafqaz University - were the initiators in building e-learning teams and
crucial institutional frameworks for the implementation of e-learning pilot projects. Universities in Azerbaijan need to
develop an effective e-learning system through the Azerbaijan e-Learning Network experience, which shares the skills and
expertise that has been amassed in terms of e-learning design and the support of online teaching (Muradkhanli & Atabeyli,
2012), because the e-learning system constitutes a major investment in infrastructure for universities (Alsabawy et al., 2016).

1.1. Research problem

Crawford and Persaud (2013) asserted that even if extensive funds are allocated, some organizations still fail to achieve any
of the anticipated benefits from e-learning projects. Lee, Hsieh, and Ma (2011) defined e-learning system as an information
system that integrates a wide variety of instructional materials, such as audio, video or text media, via chat sessions, online
discussions, e-mail, quizzes and assignments. From the students' perspective, the major benefits of e-learning are academic
performance, career development, and social value (Alsabawy et al., 2016). E-learning systems rely heavily on digital media
and telecommunications, so shortcomings can negatively impact user satisfaction. Universities/Institutes require support to
design for participation when intervening to resolve e-learning implementation problems, as well as for increasing the
benefits of using virtual learning environments (VLE), which problem is addressed by ensuring an appropriate design before
students arrive.1 VLE refers to a system that delivers learning materials to students through the Internet (Oxford University
Press, 2015). This platform uses student assessment and tracking features and can be accessed on and off-campus to provide
support for student learning at any time (Phungsuk, Viriyavejakul, & Ratanaolarn, 2017). According to Muradkhanli and
Atabeyli (2012), the major challenges of implementing e-learning in Azerbaijan are the accessibility of the Internet for
learners, safety and infrastructure, technical skills, support by university administration, lack of expertise in instructional the
design and development of content, training of instructions, staff and students and learners' motivation, in terms of students’
willingness to be sufficiently responsible to work alone. E-learning users are willing to receive high quality educational
services (Alsabawy et al., 2016). Therefore, this research addresses the following questions:
RQ1. What factors determine the students’ BI to use e-learning for educational purposes?
RQ2. Do technical skills, in other words the TI of students, have a moderating role to increase their BI towards e-learning
system?
RQ2. Could the GETAMEL model be applied to the e-learning system of Azerbaijan, in order to overcome the challenges of
implementing e-learning and offer a comprehensive e-learning system?

1.2. Research objectives

E-learning scholars have previously extended the technology acceptance model (TAM), using various external factors for
decades, which has resulted in numerous external factors and an extended TAM in the context of e-learning adoption studies
(Abdullah & Ward, 2016; Lefievre, 2012; Martin, 2012; Williams & Williams, 2009). The TAM has been predominantly used to
identify the factors that affect learners' decision to use a new learning system, including computer self-efficacy, social in-
fluence, perceived enjoyment, computer anxiety and experience. The major purpose of the TAM is to explain the individual's
behavior towards the adoption of technology. The central variables of the TAM, which are PEOU and PU, are affected by
external factors and impact an individual's negative or positive attitudes toward technology use. Alsabawy et al. (2016)
posited that PU is a major element in the measurement of the acceptance and success of an e-learning system and that
there is a lack of evidence as to the effect of IT infrastructure services on the usefulness of an e-learning system. Attitude also
influences BI towards the use of the technology, which in its turn leads to actual use. Former studies confirmed the validity
and importance of the TAM to predict technology acceptance behavior (Abdullah, Ward, & Ahmed, 2016; Al-Gahtani, 2016).
King and He (2006) also reported that the TAM is a robust model. Abdullah and Ward (2016) developed the GETAMEL model
using comprehensive meta-analysis of the 107 studies, in order to classify the most frequently used five external factors for
the TAM. The authors hypothesiszed the relationship between the five external factors - SE (used in 51 studies), SN/Social
influence (SI) (used in 32 studies), ENJOY (used in 23 studies), CA (used in 19 studies), and EXP (used in 13 studies), for TAM
and PEOU, as well as the PU for e-learning.
The GETAMEL model was further validated by Abdullah et al. (2016), who determined the BI of students to use e-portfolios.
An e-portfolio is “a collection of digital artefacts that demonstrates what a person knows and can do. It is used in academic
assessment, career planning, and for documenting and demonstrating students' learning and growth over time” (Xuesong,
Olfman, & Firpo, 2011). However, to the authors' best knowledge, there have been no empirical studies using the GETA-
MEL model to determine the factors that influence the BI of students to use an e-learning system, particularly in Azerbaijan.
The GETAMEL is the most modern model that has been validated for e-learning and m-learning, so the recent study uses this
model to predict the BI to use VLEs in Azerbaijan. M-learning refers to learning through the use of small computing mobile

1
http://elearning.edu.az/.
130 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

devices, including smartphones and portable handheld devices (Mcconatha, Praul, & Lynch, 2008). TI is defined as the
willingness of an individual to try new information technologies (Agrawal & Prasad, 1998). The authors showed that the
existence of TI in technology acceptance occurs via the relationship of TI with beliefs. This study also uses TI as a moderating
variable in the relationships between SN and PU, between PU and BI and between PEOU and BI. According to Midgley &
Dowling (1987), TI is a key moderator for the antecedents and the consequences of perceptions. Therefore, TI moderates
the input and output processes for the TAM model. Based on former studies in the context of consumer behavior, technology
use among students, undergraduate students’ acceptance of e-books and mobile learning in higher education, TI is included
as a moderating variable, in order to determine whether the TI level alters the BI of university students to use e-learning
(Nysveen, Pedersen, & Thorjornsen, 2005; Raman, 2011; Ngafeeson & Sun, 2015; Al-Emran & Shaalan, 2016). An e-book was
defined by Ngafeeson and Sun (2015) as “a piece of electronic text, regardless of size or digital object used, made available
digitally for any device that uses a screen for the purpose of instruction and learning.”
In summary, this study intends to use the GETAMEL in order to examine which external factors impact undergraduate
students' PEOU and PU of e-learning system and their BI towards the use of e-learning system for educational purpose, which
will enhance students' e-learning process. In addition, this research aims to answer the question whether TI facilitates
students’ BI towards the use of e-learning system. By using the quantitative statistical analysis methods, the hypothesized
relationships between the study variables are tested, which helps answering the addressed questions of the research.
The major contribution of this study is that because Azerbaijan is in the early stages of ICT and Internet penetration into
society and within its educational institutions, this method will provide significant insights for e-learning system designers,
decision makers in higher education institutions and government organizations, such as the Ministry of Education, to
implement initiatives to extend e-learning and to create an appropriate infrastructure that facilitates the learning process and
motivates the active inclusion of all students in an interactive learning process. It will also serve as a guide for e-learning
system designers, in terms of the factors that are important to the functionality, usefulness and facility of the e-learning
system. Identification of the factors that create a positive attitude and intention for undergraduate students to adopt e-
learning are vital in terms of the deployment of an e-learning environment and infrastructure in the universities.

2. Theoretical framework

According to the E-learning Market Trends & Forecast 2014e2016 Report by Docebo (2014), of the 85 countries included in
the study, Vietnam, Malaysia, Romania, Azerbaijan, Thailand, Kenya, Slovakia, the Philippines, India and China are the
countries with the highest growth rates. They have experienced over 30% growth, which is more than four times the average
worldwide growth rate. Azerbaijan has the fourth highest e-learning growth rate in the world and the highest in Eastern
Europe. The Russian Federation is the most mature market in Eastern Europe because of the rapid growth of online learning in
an academic context.

2.1. The general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning (GETAMEL)

Abdullah and Ward (2016) discovered that SE, SN, ENJOY, CA and EXP are the most commonly used confirmed external
factors for the TAM of 152 different external variables. This paper uses these five commonly used and confirmed external
factors as external variables for the proposed GETAMEL. Abdullah et al. (2016) applied the GETAMEL to study undergraduate
students' e-portfolio adoption using these five external factors. Their findings show that SN and ENJOY positively and
significantly influence PU, while EXP, SN, ENJOY and SE positively influence PEOU. CA is not a significant predictor. This study
uses and empirically tests the GETAMEL in the context of e-learning in Azerbaijan, by determining the effects of the five
external variables (SE, SN, ENJOY, ICT anxiety and Prior Experience) on students' PEOU and PU for mobile learning and de-
termines how students’ attitudes can influence their BI to use e-learning for educational purposes. TI is considered to have a
moderating effect in the relationships between SN and PU and between PU and PEOU and BI.

2.2. Research hypotheses based on external variables

2.2.1. Subjective norm (SN)

According to Abdullah and Ward (2016), SN/SI has been used in 32 studies, in 27 of which its relationship with TAM is
confirmed. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) referred to SN as “a person's perception that most people who are important to him
think he should or should not perform the behavior in question.” SN is defined as “the extent to which a student perceives
pressure from members of his or her environment to use e-learning systems” (Aguda-Peregrina, Hernandez-Garcia, &
Pascual-Miguel, 2014) in the e-learning use context. In a previous study, SN and social influence were shown to be similar and
both are related to the influence of social factors on technology use (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). Venkatesh and
Davis (2000) proposed the TAM2 model, which predicts that SN to has an influence on PU and intention to use technology.
The results of their study showed that it is negatively related to PU, but that it positively and significantly impacts intention to
use technology. Mathieson (1991) showed that SN has no significant effect on intention, but Taylor and Todd (1995)
discovered a significant impact. Abdullah et al. (2016) found that SN is significant predictor of PEOU, but not significant in
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 131

determining the PU for e-portfolio adoption among the students. Abdullah and Ward (2016) found that 19 of 22 studies found
a significant and positive link between SN and PU (Al-Ammari & Hamad, 2008; Karaali, Gumussoy, & Calisir, 2011; Rejon-
Guardia, Sanchez-Fernandez, & Munoz-Leiva, 2013). Other studies also found that SN has a positive and significant impact
on PEOU for e-learning (Motaghian, Hassanzadeh, & Moghadam, 2013). This study incorporates the relationship between SN
and PU and PEOU and the BI to use e-learning suggested by Abdullah and Ward (2016) and Venkatesh and Davis (2000) and
hypothesizes that:
H1. SN positively and significantly influences PU for e-learning.
H2. SN positively and significantly influences PEOU for e-learning.
H3. SN positively and significantly influences BI to use e-learning.

2.2.2. Experience (EXP)

Literature on e-learning acceptance confirms that experience affects both learners’ PEOU (De Smet, Bourgonjon, De Wever,
Schellens, & Valcke, 2012; Lee et al., 2011; Lee, Hsieh, & Chen, 2013; Purnomo & Lee, 2013) and PU (Lee et al., 2013; Martin,
2012; Purnomo & Lee, 2013; Rezaei, Mohammadi, Asadi, & Kalantary, 2008) for e-learning. Individuals who have more
experience using computers, the Internet and email and saving and locating files tend to have more favorable feelings towards
the ease of use and usefulness of an e-learning system (Lee et al., 2013, 184; Purnomo & Lee, 2013). Another study showed that
computer experience impacts learners' intention to use different e-learning systems and technologies (Premchaiswadi,
Porouhan, & Premchaiswadib, 2012; Williams & Williams, 2009; De Smet et al., 2012). According to Abdullah and Ward
(2016), EXP is the fifth most commonly used external factor for the TAM, in the context of e-learning acceptance or use,
and this variable was included as the external factor for the TAM in the GETAMEL framework. This study proposes that:
H4. EXP positively and significantly influences PU for e-learning.
H5. EXP positively and significantly influences PEOU for e-learning.

2.2.3. Perceived enjoyment (ENJOY)

The conception of ENJOY is in agreement with intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000) and in the setting of information
systems use it is defined as “the extent to which the activity of using a specific system is perceived to be enjoyable in its own
right, aside from any performance consequences resulting from system use” (Park, Son, & Kim, 2012). It is important in
explaining e-learning adoption. Abdullah and Ward (2016) also identified previous studies that showed that perceived ENJOY
significantly influences both PEOU and PU for e-learning. Other studies also show that ENJOY increases students' intention to
use e-learning (e.g. Cheng, 2012; Yang & Lin, 2011; Zare & Yazdanparast, 2013). According to Abdullah and Ward (2016), eight
out of eleven studies (73%) found a significant positive relationship between ENJOY and PEOU for e-learning. In terms of the
relationship between ENJOY and PU, eight out of eight studies (100%) showed a significant and positive link between the two
constructs. If a student finds the use of an e-learning system to be enjoyable, he/she is more likely to have a positive attitude
towards the ease of use and usefulness of a system (Al-Aulamie, Mansour, Daly, & Adjei, 2012; Chen, Lin, Yeh, & Lou, 2013;
Zare & Yazdanparast, 2013) and a greater intention to use the system (Lee, Cheung, & Chen, 2005; Cheng, 2011; 2012). In
all user types and e-learning settings, the average effect of ENJOY on PEOU is 0.260. The average effect of ENJOY on students'
PEOU for e-learning system is 0.341, which is a medium effect, in terms of the guidelines that were proposed by Cohen (1992).
Across all user types and e-learning types, the average effect of ENJOY on PU is 0.418. The average effect of ENJOY on students'
PU for e-learning systems is 0.452, which is almost a large effect in terms of the guidelines that were proposed by Cohen
(1992). Previous studies show that Perceived ENJOY also has a significant influence on PU and PEOU in an e-learning
context. Therefore:
H6. ENJOY positively and significantly influences PU for e-learning.
H7. ENJOY positively and significantly influences PEOU for e-learning.

2.2.4. Computer anxiety (CA)

Anxiety about technology use is identified as an important determinant for new technology adoption. Venkatesh et al.
(2003) referred it as “evoking anxious or emotional reactions when it comes to performing a behavior.” CA is an
emotional reaction, which usually results from a fear of having a negative outcome after using the computer (i.e. damaging
the equipment or looking foolish). Igbaria and Parasuraman (1989) explained CA as “the tendency of an individual to be
uneasy, apprehensive, or fearful about the current or future use of computers in general.” According to Alenezi, Abdul Karim,
and Veloo (2010), CA plays a large role in e-learning adoption in higher education settings. Abdullah and Ward (2016) found
that 59% of studies prove the negative influence of CA on a learner's PEOU in an e-learning context. The average effect of the
independent variable on dependent variables is -0.199 in the study of Abdullah and Ward (2016). Therefore, this relationship
is included in the proposed model. However, the relationship between CA and PU is not included because only two out of
seven studies found a significant negative link between the variables in all types of e-learning and user context. The average
effect of CA on PU is 0.002 and on students' PU for an e-learning systems is 0.070. Abdullah et al. (2016) did not test the
132 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

relationship between CA and PU in their study of e-portfolios. While, it is agreed that anxiety plays a role in the adoption of
mobile technology, its role has yet to be tested empirically (Chu, Hwang, Huang, & Wu, 2008). Mac Callum, Jeffrey, and
Kinshuk (2014) compared the role of ICT literacy and anxiety in the adoption of mobile learning and found that in a stu-
dent model, there is a significant path between ICT anxiety and PU opposed to the educator model. Therefore.
H8. CA negatively and significantly influences PU for e-learning.
H9. CA negatively and significantly influences PEOU for e-learning.

2.2.5. Self-efficacy (SE)

Abdullah and Ward (2016) found that SE is the most common external factor for the TAM model. 51 studies used this factor
and in 45, its relationship with the TAM is confirmed. Perceived SE is “belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the
courses of action required to produce given attainments.” (Bandura, 1997). It is related not to the number of skills that a
learner has, but to the learner's belief that he/she can do with what he/she has, under a variety of circumstances or situations
(Bandura, 1997; Rodgers, Conner, & Murray, 2008). Previous studies have found that perceived SE is positively predicted with
achievement-related behaviors, such as motivation, effectiveness, or positive attitudes (Bandura, 1986; Liaw, 2008). In m-
learning environments, a high degree of perceived SE leads to improved behavioral withholding (Liaw, 2008). Previous
research has showed that improved SE is highly correlated with the PU for using learning technologies and that male learners
have more positive attitudes towards communication with other learners in technology-based learning environments (Chu &
Chu, 2010; Liaw, 2008). It was also found that learners' SE influences their attitudes and ability to acquire skills, to select
activities and to continue on a course of action in m-learning environments. According to Abdullah and Ward (2016), of 41
studies of the impact of SE on PEOU for e-learning, and 33 confirm its positive and significant relationship with the latter
variable. Abdullah et al. (2016) also found that SE has a positive influence on PEOU, but a negative influence on PU, in e-
portfolios adoption. Therefore, this study presents the following hypotheses:
H10. SE positively and significantly influences PU for e-learning.
H11. SE positively and significantly influences PEOU for e-learning.

2.2.6. The TAM variables

The relationships between PEOU and PU and between PEOU and PU and BI have been validated by previous studies (Davis,
1989; Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Lin, Fofanah, & Liang, 2011). PEOU and PU are the most
important constructs for the TAM (Chen, Lin, Yeh, & Lou, 2013). They directly influence e-learning use intention (Al-Gahtani,
2016; Hsia, Chang, & Tseng, 2014; Tarhini, Hone, & Liu, 2014). The inclusion of external variables in the TAM allows studies to
determine technology adoption behavior, and to identify the specific reasons for the selection of a suitable technology, which
also causes scholars and practitioners to take corrective steps (Davis et al., 1989). There is also a relationship between PEOU
and PU, which shows that PEOU is a determinant of PU. The strong relationship between PEOU and PU denotes that those who
think that a new technology is easy to use also find it very useful (Davis, 1985; 1989; Davis et al., 1989). Therefore, PEOU is
likely to have a direct influence on PU.
H12. PEOU positively and significantly influences PU.
H13. PU positively and significantly influences BI to use e-learning.
H14. PEOU positively and significantly influences BI to use e-learning.

2.2.7. TI as a moderator
TI has been conceptualized as a trait (Midgley & Dowling, 1987). In terms of the existence of TI in technology use, Agarwal
and Prasad (1998) showed that this happens through TI's relationships with beliefs or perceptions. While concurring with
Midgley and Dowling (1987) that the trait-behavior model is an inadequate representation of technology adoption behavior,
it was proposed that TI is a key moderator for antecedents and the consequence of perceptions in technology use. In other
words, TI moderates the input processes (antecedents) for the TAM model and the output processes. More specifically, in the
proposed model, TI moderates the relationships between SN and PU and between PU and PEOU and BI to use e-learning.
Therefore, it is proposed that:
H15. TI moderates the relationship between SN and PU.
H16. TI moderates the relationship between PU and BI to use e-learning.
H17. TI moderates the relationship between PEOU and BI to use e-learning.
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 133

3. Research methodology

In this study, the research model (see Fig. 1) is developed by extensively reviewing the previous literature, with particular
reference to the two most recent studies (Abdullah & Ward, 2016; Abdullah et al., 2016). The five external variables that were
identified by Abdullah and Ward (2016) are included. TI is a moderating variable because of its relevancy to the TAM (Midgley
& Dowling, 1987; Ngafeeson & Sun, 2015). In this study, “BI to use e-learning” is used to show the actual influence on the use
of e-learning. Former studies also asserted that BI might be combined with use behavior and termed “BI to use” because these
two factors have been proven to be related (Alshehri, Drew, & AlGhamdi, 2013). The UTAUT was developed by Venkatesh et al.
(2003) to predict user acceptance and behavior, using four determinants: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social
influence and facilitating conditions. From the theoretical point of view, “UTAUT provides a refined view of how the de-
terminants of intention and behavior evolve over time.” Kurfali, Arifoglu, Tokdemir, and Pacin (2017) also combined BI and
actual use in their Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model to predict e-government use behavior.
This study uses a quantitative method to collect the data. An online survey was administered because this ensures a
geographical distribution in the most cost- and time-efficient way (Kurfali et al., 2017). Since this was the first time that this
type of study had been conducted in Azerbaijan using the TAM, an initial survey questionnaire based on former studies and
was created and translated into Azeri and then refined using the results of the pre-test, which had 17 respondents. The pre-
testing results allowed the construction of the final version of the questionnaire. The final version of the questionnaire
comprised 30, questions including 4 questions that were related to the demographic profile of respondents (see Appendix A).
Items for the external factors of TAM were taken from Abdullah et al. (2016), because this study validated the items for e-
portfolio adoption, which is strongly related to the e-learning context. The items for the TAM variables were taken from Davis
(1989), Venkatesh and Bala (2008) and Venkatesh and Davis (2000). Finally, the items for TI were taken from Ngafeeson and
Sun (2015). This study focused on the TAM for e-book acceptance among undergraduate students, so the wording for items for
the TI was changed to ensure relevance to this study. A 5-point Likert scale - (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree - was
used to measure the responses. Cronbach's Alpha was used for reliability analysis and the results show that alpha values for all
variables exceed 0.7, so the final questionnaire is reliable.2
AMOS 23 software was used to analyze the data using the SEM technique. As suggested by Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and
Black (1998), this study initially evaluated the measurement model which was followed by the structural model in the second

TI

SN H3
H1
H15 H16 H17
H2
EXP H4
PU
H5
H13
H6 BI to use
ENJOY H12
H7 e-learning
H14
H8 PEOU
H9
CA

H10 H11

SE Direct effect
Moderating effect

Fig. 1. Conceptual model.

2
Reliability test was used again after the data collection finished, and the final outcomes are presented in the Results section.
134 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

stage. The analysis comprised of an analysis of construct validity (convergent and discriminant validity), model testing with
model fitting and hypothesis testing.

3.1. Survey

To determine the factors that affect BI to use e-learning among university students in Azerbaijan, an online survey was
used. The survey items were taken from the studies by Abdullah et al. (2016), Davis (1989), Venkatesh and Bala (2008),
Venkatesh and Davis (2000) and Ngafeeson and Sun (2015) (see Appendix A) and translated into Azeri. A convenient sam-
pling technique was used for the survey process, for the universities that had successfully implemented an e-learning system
in the educational units. As previously mentioned, Khazar University, Qafqaz University and Azerbaijan Tourism University
were the first to establish e-learning teams and crucial institutional frameworks for the implementation of e-learning pilot
projects. The Azerbaijan e-Learning Coordination Council was then founded and the Azerbaijan e-Learning Network was
created, with the addition of four new educational institutions: Azerbaijan University of Architecture and Construction and
Nakhchivan State University.

3.2. Pre-test

The study questionnaire was pre-tested using 17 respondents from the most experienced group of users of e-learning in
Khazar University and the Baku State University. The questions that relate to the items for SN, CA and SE were re-worded,
based on the respondents' feedback. The quality of the survey was improved and the subjects' understanding of the final
questionnaire was improved. As stated previously, Cronbach's Alpha was used for reliability analysis and the results show that
the alpha values of all variables exceed 0.7, so the final questionnaire is reliable.

3.3. Data collection

In total, there were 763 respondents to the online survey. Because of unfinished responses, 49 questionnaires were dis-
carded. 714 complete questionnaires (93.6%) were used for the analysis of the conceptual model. Table 1 shows that 57.8% of
the students who participated in the study were males. The majority of the respondents were 22e25 years old and in the
second year of study at university. 47.1% had 3e6 years of computer literacy, which allows confidence in the responses to the
use of e-learning in education.

4. Data analysis and results

4.1. Measurement

All of the constructs for this study were initially tested for reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. Ac-
cording to Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson (2010), a reliability test is “an assessment of the degree of consistency between
multiple measurements of a variable”, and this must be conducted before an assessment of its validity. This study uses the
Cronbach's alpha (a) to test the internal consistency of the study constructs (construct reliability) (Nunnally, 1978; Robert &
Wortzel, 1979). The Cronbach's alpha (a) results show that two constructs demonstrate excellent reliability (ENJOY e 0.91 and

Table 1
Demographic profile of respondents.

Demographic profile (N ¼ 714) Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender
Male 413 57.8
Female 301 42.2

Age
18e21 years old 178 24.9
22e25 years old 395 55.3
26þ years old 141 19.7

Year of study
Year 1 109 15.3
Year 2 386 54.1
Year 3 126 17.6
Final year 93 13.0

Experience in using mobile devices

Less than 1 year 37 5.2
1 to 3 years 177 24.8
3 to 6 years 336 47.1
More than 6 years 164 23.0
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 135

SE e 0.90) and seven constructs demonstrate high reliability (SN e 0.82, EXP e 0.84, CA e 0.79, PU e 0.81, PEOU e 0.86, BI e
0.79 and TI e 0.83) based on the four cut-off points suggested by Hinton, Brownlow, McMurray, and Cozens (2004). The four
cut-off points are: (1) excellent reliability (0.90 and above); (2) high reliability (0.70e0.90); (3) moderate reliability
(0.50e0.70) and (4) low reliability (0.50 and below). The higher Cronbach's Alpha values mean that all constructs are
internally consistent (see Table 2). The item reliability for the underlying items for each construct was measured using
standardized factor loadings (Shih, 2004). The results show that all of the loading of items are greater than 0.72, which is
higher than the 0.5 level. The factor loading for only 4 items e CA3, PEOU1, BI1 and TI1 - ranges between 0.72 and 0.79. The
items, SE2, TI3, CA2, PU1 and BI2, are highly loaded to their underlying constructs and show higher item reliability.
A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to measure the scale validity (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). The indicator
factor loadings must be significant and higher than the 0.7 acceptance level, composite reliability (CR) must be higher than
0.7, and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for each construct must exceed the acceptance level of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981;
Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006). As seen in Table 2, both of the conditions are met, which means that this study
has adequate convergent validity.
Discriminant validity is usually verified using the square root of the AVE for each construct that has a higher correlation
with other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 3 demonstrates that the square root of the AVE for each construct is
greater than its correlation values with other constructs, so there is good discriminant validity.
The fit of the measurement model was evaluated using CFA. Hair et al. (2006) suggested several measures of model-fit to
estimate the measurement model: (1) Chi-square/degree of freedom (c2/df), (2) the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), (3) the
comparative fit index (CFI), (4) the root mean square error for approximation (RMSEA) and (5) the standardized root mean
residual (SRMR). The results for the measurement of model fit show that all model-fit indices are acceptable, as shown in
Table 4. It is concluded that this measurement model adequately explains the data.

Table 2
The Measurement model.

Items Mean STD Standardized factor loading a CR AVE

SN 0.82 0.81 0.68
SN1 3.16 0.95 0.84
SN2 2.88 1.07 0.81
EXP 0.84 0.86 0.67
EXP1 2.86 1.22 0.86
EXP2 2.67 0.91 0.80
EXP3 3.11 1.32 0.79
ENJOY 0.91 0.87 0.70
ENJOY1 2.85 1.05 0.83
ENJOY2 2.34 1.09 0.87
ENJOY3 2.96 0.92 0.80
CA 0.79 0.87 0.68
CA1 3.45 0.96 0.87
CA2 3.17 1.11 0.88
CA3 2.95 1.15 0.72
SE 0.90 0.88 0.71
SE1 2.67 1.08 0.84
SE2 3.03 1.02 0.89
SE3 3.05 1.21 0.80
PU 0.81 0.90 0.76
PU1 2.59 1.36 0.88
PU2 2.91 1.33 0.86
PU3 2.83 1.23 0.87
PEOU 0.79 0.84 0.64
PEOU1 3.13 0.88 0.76
PEOU2 2.79 1.05 0.84
PEOU3 2.84 1.06 0.80
BI 0.79 0.86 0.68
BI1 2.91 1.06 0.73
BI2 3.02 1.00 0.88
BI3 2.79 0.89 0.85
TI 0.83 0.89 0.73
TI1 2.87 0.89 0.79
TI2 3.01 0.98 0.87
TI3 2.92 1.39 0.89

Note: SN ¼ Subjective norm, EXP ¼ Experience, ENJOY ¼ Enjoyment, CA ¼ Computer anxiety, SE ¼ Self efficacy, PU ¼ Perceived usefulness, PEOU ¼ Perceive
ease of use, BI ¼ Behavioral intention to use e-learning, TI ¼ Technology innovativeness.
136 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

Table 3
Discriminant validity.

SN EXP ENJOY CA SE PU PEOU BI TI

SN 0.825
EXP 0.109 0.819
ENJOY 0.193 0.403 0.837
CA 0.149 0.338 0.302 0.825
SE 0.305 0.277 0.351 0.487 0.843
PU 0.123 0.387 0.427 0.067 0.491 0.872
PEOU 0.472 0.352 0.186 0.034 0.540 0.461 0.800
BI 0.301 0.387 0.378 0.125 0.361 0.608 0.703 0.825
TI 0.276 0.411 0.362 0.094 0.282 0.321 0.214 0.597 0.854

Note: Diagonal values are square root of AVEs of constructs.

4.2. Testing the measurement model

Several indices were tested in this study. These were proposed by Hair et al. (2006) to obtain a comprehensive model fit.
The measurement model testing included c2/d.f (degrees of freedom), by considering that c2 is too sensitive for a large sample
size (Bentler & Bonett, 1980). The Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error for
approximation (RMSEA) and the standardized root mean residual (SRMR) were also used. The results for the fit indices for the
proposed model are shown in Table 4. These show that the measurement mode has a good fit.

4.3. Structural model

Testing the structural model also showed that it has a good model fit (c2/d.f ¼ 1.914, TLI ¼ 0.936, CFI ¼ 0.929,
RMSEA ¼ 0.073, SRMR ¼ 0.046). When it had been shown that there was a good model fit, the study hypotheses were tested
using AMOS 23.0. Fig. 2 shows the results of the hypotheses.
SN (SN) (b ¼ 0.213, p < 0.01), Experience (XP) (b ¼ 0.181, p < 0.01) and ENJOY (ENJOY) (b ¼ 0.321, p < 0.001) are found to
have positive and significant impact on PU (PU), but CA (CA) (b ¼ -0.191, p < 0.05) is negatively related to PU (PU) and SE (SF) is
found not to be related to PU (b ¼ 0.026, p ¼ 0.152). Therefore, H1, H4, H6 and H8 are supported, but H10 is rejected. SN is also
found to be positively and significantly related to BI to use e-learning (BI) (b ¼ 0.437, p < 0.001). Therefore, H3 was supported.
EXP (b ¼ 0.496, p < 0.001), ENJOY (b ¼ 0.239, p < 0.05) and SF (b ¼ 0.246, p < 0.01) are positively and significantly related to
PEOU (PEOU), but CA negatively and significantly influences students’ belief in the ease of use of e-learning (b ¼ - 0.151,
p < 0.05). SN does not have an impact on PEOU (b ¼ 0.025, p ¼ 0.716). H5, H7, H9 and H11 are supported, but H2 is rejected.
PEOU (b ¼ 0.046, p ¼ 0.473) does not significantly impact PU. However, Students’ perceptions of PEOU (b ¼ 0.305, p < 0.05)
and PU (b ¼ 0.241, p < 0.01) for e-learning positively and significantly affect their BI to use it for educational purposes.
Therefore, H13 and H14 are supported, but H12 is rejected.

4.4. Moderation analysis

TI was tested as a moderator. A moderator is a qualitative or quantitative variable that affects the direction and/or strength
of the relationship between an independent or predictor variable and a dependent or criterion variable. Using the method of
Baron and’ Kenny (1986), the moderating effect of TI was tested in the relationships between SN and PU and between PU and
PEOU and BI. SN is shown to be an independent variable, but PU is a dependent variable in the first moderation analysis. It is
shown that TI has a significant moderating impact on the proposed relationships (H15). In the second moderation analysis, TI
is found to have a moderating effect on the relationship between PU and BI to use e-learning, but it does not moderate the
relationship between PEOU (b ¼ 0.031, p ¼ 0.625) and BI, so H16 is supported, but H17 is not. Table 5 shows the total effect of
TI items and this result shows that these items together (SN * TI) (b ¼ 0.386, p < 0.001) and (PU * TI) (b ¼ 0.419, p < 0.001)
strongly impact the BI of students towards the use of e-learning.

5. Discussion and implications

This study validates the GETAMEL model in the context of e-learning for students' educational purposes in universities. It
is found that SN, EXP and ENJOY significantly and positively influence the university students' belief in the usefulness of e-
learning, but CA negatively affects their perception of e-learning as useful. Therefore, this study's findings for ENJOY only
comply with the findings of Abdullah et al. (2016), who determined that ENJOY is highly significant in students' perception of
the usefulness of e-portfolios. This study found that SE and EXP negatively affect PU for e-portfolios, but SN has no significant
impact. Abdullah et al. (2016) showed that in the e-learning domain, SN is not related to social influence toward the decision
making, but to peers' and teachers' opinions and educational institution policies may affect the likelihood that students use an
e-learning system. Therefore, in Azerbaijani universities, if students perceive that influential individuals think that they
should use e-learning system, they perceive the system to be more useful for educational purposes (Cheng, 2011; Van Raaij &
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 137

Table 4
Measurement model fit indices.

Model fit indices Model Recommended values Source

c2/d.f 1.873 <3.00 Kline (2005), McDonald and Ho (2002)
TLI 0.925 0.90
CFI 0.943 0.90
RMSEA 0.061 <0.08
SRMR 0.037 <0.05

TI

SN .437***
.213**
.386*** .419** .031

.025
EXP .181**

.496*** PU
.241**
.321*** BI to use
ENJOY .239* .046
e-learning

-.191* PEOU .205*

-.151*
CA
.246**
.026

SE

Supported

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05 Not supported

Fig. 2. Structural model.

Table 5
Moderation analysis results.

Step Predictor Moderator Outcome b - values

Step 1 SN No PU 0.213**
Step 2 TI No PU 0.228**
Step 3 SN * TI Yes PU 0.386***
Step 4 PU No BI 0.241**
Step 5 PEOU No BI 0.205*
Step 6 TI No BI 0.189*
Step 7 PU * TI Yes BI 0.419**
Step 8 PEOU * TI Yes BI 0.031

***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.

Schepers, 2008). This study finds that the relationship between SN and PU is in agreement with the results of the studies by
Lee (2006), Al-Ammari and Hamad (2008) and Farahat (2012). The study's findings on the relationship between EXP and PU
are similar to those of Abbad, Morris, and de Nahlik (2009), but not similar to those of Pituch and Lee (2006), Rezaei et al.
(2008), Lau and Woods (2008), or Williams and Williams (2009). The outcome of the relationship between ENJOY and PU
was also confirmed to be positive and significant in the previous studies (Al-Gahtani, 2016; Shyu & Huang, 2011; Chen et al.,
2013; Martinez-Torres et al., 2008; Al-Ammary, Al-Sherooqi, & Al-Sherooqi, 2014). This study finds that CA creates negative
perceptions of the usefulness of the use of an e-learning system, which is in agreement with the findings of Purnomo and Lee
138 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

(2013) and Park et al. (2012), in the context of employee e-learning, but not in agreement with the results of Saad_e and Kira
(2006) or Liu (2010), who had found that CA does not influence students' e-learning. These findings show that EXP, SN and the
feeling, ENJOY, create more positive perceptions for students of the usefulness of e-learning for educational purposes.
However, the greater the anxiety about using new technology, the less useful is e-learning for students in an education
process.
This study finds that EXP, ENJOY and SE create a more positive belief in the ease of use of e-learning, but SN does not
significantly influence students' beliefs. CA is a significant and negative predictor of their belief in the ease of using the e-
learning system. Abdullah et al. (2016) found that SE, EXP, ENJOY and SN have a positive impact on student's intent to adopt e-
portfolios. Therefore, the results of that study are in agreement with those for this study. The positive and significant impact of
SE, EXP and ENJOY on PEOU is similar to that noted by previous studies (Abbad et al., 2009; Al-Ammari & Hamad, 2008; Lee,
2006; Park, 2009; Al-Gahtani, 2016; Shyu & Huang, 2011; Chen et al., 2013). The insignificant impact of SN on PEOU is
confirmed in the studies of Park (2009) and Park, Nam, and Cha (2012). CA is also proven to be a negative predictor of the
perception that an e-learning system is easy to use, in Azerbaijani settings, which is in agreement with the results of the
studies by Al-Gahtani (2016), Agudo-Peregrina, Hernandez-García, & Pascual-Miguel (2014), Lefievre (2012) and Ali, Ahmed,
Tariq, and Safdar (2013), but Abdullah et al. (2016) found that it is not a significant predictor of PEOU. That is to say that the
experience, feeling of enjoyment and self-confidence of students allows them to easily use e-learning, but anxiety about new
technology creates a negative perception of the ease of use for an e-learning system.
The link between SN and BI was suggested by Venkatesh and Davis (2000), in the context of the new technology
acceptance. The authors showed that SN significantly predicts the intention to use the technology in mandatory settings
(b ¼ 0.31**, n ¼ 43; b ¼ 0.28**, n ¼ 36), but not in voluntary settings (b ¼ 0.11, n ¼ 38; b ¼ 0.10, n ¼ 39). This study's findings for
the relationship between SN and BI is similar to these findings, so university students might choose to use e-learning, even
though they are not themselves motivated toward the behavior or its outcomes. Therefore, they comply with their referents in
their behavior, because they think that they should use an e-learning system. Taylor and Todd (1995) found a significant
impact, but Mathieson (1991) found no significant impact for SN on intention.
PEOU does not significantly influence PU, which is not in agreement with the results of Abdullah et al. (2016). The results of
this study, in terms of the effect of PU and PEOU on BI to use e-learning is in agreement with these results.
In light of previous studies by Abdullah and Ward (2016) and more modern research by Abdullah et al. (2016), TI was tested
as a moderator. It is found to significantly moderate the relationship between SN and PU and between PU and BI. The findings
for its moderating effect on SN to PU and PEOU to BI are similar to those of Ngafeeson and Sun (2015). Even if students think
that their peers' and teachers’ opinions on the usefulness of the e-learning system are important, their innovation also in-
creases their belief in system usefulness. If students think that a system is easy to use, their level of innovation does not play
an important role in the decision to use the e-learning system.
The findings of this study show that the GETAMEL model can be successfully applied in the e-learning system for
Azerbaijan education. It is also shown that the factors, SN, EXP and ENJOY, allow educators and decision makers to design an
e-learning system to increase students' perception of the system usefulness. EXP, ENJOY and SE are also the main factors in
creating the feeling that a system is easy to use. As mentioned previously, the major challenges for e-learning system
deployment are student motivation and technical factors. Using these factors to design an e-learning system significantly
increases student motivation to use the e-learning system for educational purposes. However, anxiety toward using a new
technology reduces motivation to use the system. Therefore, decision makers must focus on reducing the anxiety of the
students toward the technology. This study concludes that training educators is a necessary step for eliminating anxiety. TI
increases the level of students' BI to use e-learning for those who think that the system is useful, so the training of students
and educators must focus on increasing students’ orientation towards the use of technology.
This study is one of the very few that validates the GETAMEL for students’ perceptions and intention to use an e-learning
system for educational purposes in Azerbaijan. The major theoretical implications are that there is a negative and significant
link between CA and PU and PEOU. However, the majority of previous studies found this relationship to be insignificant and
Abdullah et al. (2016) did not include the relationship between CA and PU in their study. Studies that determine a significant
link are related to employee e-learning. This study is the first to gather empirical evidence in student e-learning settings. This
study also tests TI, because it is necessary to test its effect on the acceptance of new technology for students in an e-learning
system. Future studies might use the same model for different settings, in order to test and compare human behavior in terms
of discipline, gender, age or culture.

6. Conclusion

The major objective of the study was to explore the factors determining undergraduate students’ attitudes towards
usefulness and easiness of the e-learning system, as well as their BI to use it for educational purpose. Additionally, it was
aimed to answer the question whether TI facilitates their BI towards the use of e-learning system. This study demonstrates
that the GETAMEL model with the inclusion of the most commonly used external factors explains and predicts the attitude of
undergraduate students to the use of e-learning as an educational tool, to facilitate their learning process and increase ef-
ficiency. Positive attitudes towards e-learning also increase the intention to adopt this learning type in universities. In terms
of the academic and practical implications of this research, it is shown that the external factors that were identified by
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 139

Abdullah and Ward (2016) and employed by Abdullah et al. (2016) also apply to e-learning in Azerbaijan. This study finds a
significant relationship between the following variables:

 SN and PU (positive)
 EXP and PU, PEOU (positive)
 ENJOY and PU, PEOU (positive)
 CA and PU, PEOU (negative)
 SE and PEOU (positive)
 PU, PEOU and BI (positive)
 TI with SN and PU (positive)
 TI with PU and BI (positive)

Therefore, EXP, SN, ENJOY, CA and SE are significant factors that affect the perception of an e-learning system's usefulness,
ease of use and usage intention. Therefore, educational institutions must consider these factors when designing an e-learning
system. Educational institutions and decision makers must also the anxiety toward the use of new technologies in a young
generation by providing training and technical support. Designers of e-learning systems must increase the usefulness and
ease of use of e-learning system by making them user-friendly and functional. Innovation must also be increased, in order to
create more positive attitudes towards the use of e-learning. Therefore, the government initiatives have an immense role to
play. Increasing Internet penetration clearly allows students to become familiar with new technologies and makes them more
willing to use them for educational purposes. The findings of this study are a guide for planning an e-learning strategy for
leading universities in Azerbaijan, which will increase the quality of education and allow equal participation by all students,
regardless of location or time, by giving an access to study materials, lectures and learning resources.

7. Limitations and future research

This study is cross-sectional in nature, and was conducted within a short period of time. Students' perceptions of the ease
of use and usefulness of e-learning can alter over time as new knowledge and experience is accumulated. A longitudinal study
using the GETAMEL and the findings of this study might consider changes in users’ perception and behavior in different
periods. The studies by Abdullah and Ward (2016) demonstrate significantly different results for the influence of external
variables on PU, PEOU and intention to use e-learning for students, teachers and employees. Therefore, future study might use
the GETAMEL model for a comparative study, in order to differentiate the external factors and their influence on e-learning for
different subjects.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan under the grant MOST 104-2410-H-412-
003, MOST 104-2410-H-182-021-MY2T and Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (BMRP 574) during the study completion.

Appendix A. Instrument development

Subjective norm (SN) (Abdullah et al., 2016)

SN1. People who influence my behavior would think that I should use the e-learning.
SN2. People who are important to me would think that I should use e-learning.

Experience (EXP) (Abdullah et al., 2016)

EXP1. I enjoy using computers.

EXP2. I am comfortable using the internet.
EXP3. I am comfortable saving and locating files.

Enjoyment (ENJOY) (Abdullah et al., 2016)

ENJOY1. I find using e-learning enjoyable.

ENJOY2. The actual process of using the e-learning is pleasant.
ENJOY3. I have fun using the e-learning.

Computer anxiety (CA) (Abdullah et al., 2016)

CA1. Computers do not scare me at all.

140 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

CA2. Computers make me feel uncomfortable.

CA3. Working with computer makes me nervous.

Self-efficacy (SE) (Abdullah et al., 2016)

SE1. I am confident of using the e-learning even if there is no one around to show me how to do it.
SE2. I am confident of using the e-learning even if I have never used such a system before.
SE3. I am confident of using the e-learning even if I have only the software manuals for reference.

Perceived usefulness (PU) (Davis, 1989)

PU1. Using the e-learning would allow me to accomplish learning tasks more quickly.
PU2. Using the e-learning would improve my learning performance.
PU3. Using the e-learning would enhance my effectiveness in learning.

Perceive ease of use (PEOU) (Davis, 1989)

PEOU1. Learning to use the e-learning would be easy for me.

PEOU2. I would find it easy to get the e-learning to do what I want it to do.
PEOU3. My interaction with the e-learning would be clear and understandable.

Behavioral intention (BI) (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)

BI1. Assuming I had access to the e-learning, I intend to use it.

BI2. Given that I had access to the e-learning, I predict that I would use it.
BI3. I plan to use the e-learning in the future.

Technology innovativeness (TI) (Ngafeeson & Sun, 2015)

TI1. If I heard about a new information technology, I would look for ways to try it out.
TI2. Among my peers, I am usually the first to try out new information technologies.
TI3. I like to experiment with new information technologies.

References

Abbad, M. M., Morris, D., & de Nahlik, C. (2009). Looking under the bonnet: Factors affecting student adoption of e-learning systems in Jordan. International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(2), 1e25. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
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, 238e256. 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, 75e90.
Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of informational technology. Information
Systems Research, 9(2), 204e215.
Agudo-Peregrina, A. F., Hernandez-García, A., & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of electronic learning
systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 301e314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.
10.035.
Al-Ammari, J., & Hamad, S. (2008). Factors influencing the adoption of e-learning at University of Bahrain. In Second international conference and exhibition
for zain e-learning center. Retrieved from: https://uqu.edu.sa/files2/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/30/papers/f82.pdf.
Al-Ammary, J. H., Al-Sherooqi, A. K., & Al-Sherooqi, H. K. (2014). The acceptance of social networking as a learning tools at University of Bahrain. Inter-
national Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(2), 208e214. http://dx.doi.org/10.7763/IJIET, 2014. V4.400.
Al-Aulamie, A., Mansour, A., Daly, H., & Adjei, O. (2012). The effect of intrinsic motivation on learners' behavioural intention to use e-learning systems. In
International conference on information technology based higher education and training (ITHET) (pp. 1e4). IEEE. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/
summon/.
Al-Emran, E. H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56,
93e102.
Al-Gahtani, S. S. (2016). Empirical investigation of e-learning acceptance and assimilation: A structural equation model. Applied Computing and Informatics,
12(1), 27e50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2014.09.001.
Alenezi, A. R., Abdul Karim, A. M., & Veloo, A. (2010). An empirical investigation into the role of enjoyment, computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy and
internet experience in influencing the students' intention to use e-learning: A case study from Saudi Arabian governmental universities. The Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 22e34. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Ali, H., Ahmed, A. A., Tariq, T. Q., & Safdar, H. (2013). Second life (SL) in education: The intentions to use at University of Bahrain. In Fourth International
Conference on e-Learning “Best practices in management, design and development of e-courses: Standards of excellence and creativity” IEEE (pp. 205e215).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ECONF.2013.81.
Alsabawy, A. Y., Cater-Steel, A., & Soar, J. (2016). Determinants of perceived usefulness of e- learning systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 843e858.
Alshehri, M., Drew, S., & AlGhamdi, R. (2013). Analysis of citizens' acceptance for e-government services: Applying the UTAUT model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1304.
3157.
Althunibat, A. (2015). Determining the factors influencing students' intention to use m-learning in Jordan higher education. Computers in Human Behavior,
52, 65e71.
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 141

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin,
10(3), 411e423.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self- efficacy: The exercise of control. United States of America: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social Psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
consideration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173e1182.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of Covariance structures. Psychological Bulleting, 88, 588e600.
Chen, Y., Lin, Y., Yeh, R., & Lou, S. (2013). Examining factors affecting college students' intention to use web-based instruction systems: Towards an inte-
grated model. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 12(2), 111e121. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Cheng, Y. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of e-learning acceptance. Information Systems Journal, 21(3), 269e299. Retrieved from: https://library3.
hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Cheng, Y. (2012). Effects of quality antecedents on e-learning acceptance. Internet Research, 22(3), 361e390. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/
summon/.
Chu, H.-C., Hwang, G.-J., Huang, S.-X., & Wu, T.-T. (2008). A knowledge engineering approach to developing e-libraries for mobile learning. The Electronic
Library, 26(3), 303e317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640470810879464.
Chu, R. J., & Chu, A. Z. (2010). Multi-level analysis of peer support, internet self-efficacy and e Learning outcomes e the contextual effects of collectivism and
group potency. Computers & Education, 55(1), 145e154.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155e159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.
Crawford, C., & Persaud, C. (2013). Community colleges online. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 10(1), 75e82.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319e339.
Davis, F. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Unpublished Doctoral disser-
tation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science,
35, 982e1003.
De Smet, C., Bourgonjon, J., De Wever, B., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2012). Researching instructional use and the technology acceptation of learning
management systems by secondary school teachers. Computers & Education, 58(2). Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Docebo. (2014). E-learning market trends & forecast 2014-2016 report. Retrieved from: https://www.docebo.com/landing/contactform/elearning-market-
trends-and-forecast-2014-2016.docebo-report.pdf.
Farahat, T. (2012). Applying the technology acceptance model to online learning in the Egyptian Universities. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 64, 95e104.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.012.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research,
18(1), 39e50.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs.
Hair, J. R., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data anlysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
Hinton, P. R., Brownlow, C., McMurray, I., & Cozens, B. (2004). SPSS explained. London, UK: Routledge.
Hsia, J., Chang, C., & Tseng, A. (2014). Effects of individuals' locus of control and computer self-efficacy on their e-learning acceptance in high-tech com-
panies. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(1), 51e64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.702284.
Igbaria, M., & Parasuraman, S. (1989). A path analytic study of individual characteristics, computer anxiety and attitudes toward microcomputers. Journal of
Management, 15(3), 373e388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920638901500302.
Islam, A. K. M. N. (2016). E-learning system use and its outcomes: Moderating role of perceived compatibility. Telematics and Informatics, 33(1), 48e55.
Karaali, D., Gumussoy, C. A., & Calisir, F. (2011). Factors affecting the intention to use a web- based learning system among blue-collar workers in the
automotive industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 343e354. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 740e755.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Kurfali, M., Arifoglu, A., Tokdemir, G., & Pacin, Y. (2017). Adoption of e-government services in Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 168e178.
Lau, S., & Woods, P. C. (2008). An empirical study of learning object acceptance in multimedia learning environment. Communications of the IBIMA, 5(1), 1e6.
Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Lee, Y. (2006). An empirical investigation into factors influencing the adoption of an e-learning system. Online Information Review, 30(5), 517e541. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1108/14684520610706406.
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), 1095e1104. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Lee, Y., Hsieh, Y., & Chen, Y. (2013). An investigation of employees' use of e-learning systems: Applying the technology acceptance model. Behaviour and
Information Technology, 32(2), 173e189. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Lee, Y., Hsieh, Y., & Ma, C. (2011). A model of organizational employees' e-learning systems acceptance. Knowledge-based Systems, 24(3), 355e366. Retrieved
from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Lefievre, V. (2012). Gender differences in acceptance by students of training software for office tools. In Athens: ATINER’S Conference Paper Series, No: EDU
2012-0138. Retrieved from: http://www.atiner.gr/papers/EDU2012-0138.pdf.
Liaw, S. S. (2008). Investigating students' perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the blackboard system.
Computers & Education, 51(2), 864e873.
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(2011), 271e279.
Liu, X. (2010). Empirical testing of a theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: An exploratory study of educational wikis. Communication
Education, 59(1), 52e69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520903431745.
Mac Callum, K., Jeffrey, L., & Kinshuk. (2014). Comparing the role of ICT literacy and anxiety in the adoption of mobile learning. Computers in Human
Behavior, 39, 8e19.
Martin, R. G. (2012). Factors affecting the usefulness of social networking in e-Learning at German University of Technology in Oman. International Journal
of e-Education, e- Business. e-Management and e-Learning, 2(6), 498e502. http://dx.doi.org/10.7763/IJEEEE.2012.V2.171.
Martinez-Torres, M. R., Marin, S. L. T., Garcia, F. B., Vazquez, S. G., Oliva, M. A., & Torres, T. (2008). A technological acceptance of e-learning tools used in
practical and laboratory teaching, according to the European higher education area. Behaviour & Information Technology, 27(6), 495e505. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/01449290600958965.
Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behaviour. Information Systems
Research, 2(3), 173e191.
Mcconatha, D., Praul, M., & Lynch, M. J. (2008). Mobile learning in higher education: An empirical assessment of a new educational tool. Online Submission,
7(3).
McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64e82.
Midgley, D. F., & Dowling, G. R. (1987). A longitudinal study of product form innovation: The interaction between predispositions and social messages.
Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4), 611e625.
142 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143

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, 158e167. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Muradkhanli, L., & Atabeyli, B. (2012). Implementaton of eLearning in Azerbaijan. Retrieved from:http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?
arnumber¼6398528.
Ngafeeson, M. N., & Sun, J. (2015). The effects of technology innovativeness and system exposure on student acceptance of e-textbooks. Journal of Infor-
mation Technology Education: Research, 14, 55e71.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P. E., & Thorbjornsen, H. (2005). Explaining intention to use mobile chat services: Moderating effects of gender. Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 22(5), 247e256.
Oxford University Press. (2015). Learn about virtual learning environment/Course Management System content. Retrieved from: http://tinyurl.com/o54enla.
Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students' behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592e605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01229.x.
Park, S. Y. (2009). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding University Students’ behavioral intention to USE e-Learning. Educational
Technology & Society, 12(3), 150e162. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Park, Y., Son, H., & Kim, C. (2012). Investigating the determinants of construction professionals' acceptance of web-based training: An extension of the
technology acceptance model. Automation in Construction, 22, 377e386. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Phungsuk, R., Viriyavejakul, C., & Ratanaolarn, T. (2017). Development of a problem-based learning model via a virtual learning environment. Kasetsart
Journal of Social Sciences, 1e10.
Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education, 47(2), 222e244. Retrieved from: https://
library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Premchaiswadi, W., Porouhan, P., & Premchaiswadi, N. (2012). An empirical study of the key success factors to adopt e-learning in Thailand. In International
Conference on Information Society (i-Society 2012) (pp. 333e338). Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Purnomo, S. H., & Lee, Y. (2013). E-learning adoption in the banking workplace in Indonesia: An empirical study. Information Development, 29(2), 138e153.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266666912448258.
Raman, A. (2011). The usage of technology among education students in University Utara Malaysia: An application of extended technology acceptance
model. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 7(3), 4e17.
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), 31e47. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Rezaei, M., Mohammadi, H. M., Asadi, A., & Kalantary, K. (2008). Predicting E Learning application in agricultural higher education using technology
acceptance model. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 98(1), 85e95. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED499474.pdf.
Robert, M. L., & Wortzel, L. H. (1979). New lifestyle determinants of women's food shopping behavior. Journal of Marketing, 43(3), 28e39.
Rodgers, W. M., Conner, M., & Murray, T. C. (2008). Distinguishing among perceived control, perceived difficulty, and self-efficacy as determinants of in-
tentions and behaviors. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 607e630.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54e67.
Saad_e, R. G., & Kira, D. (2006). The emotional state of technology acceptance. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 3, 529e539. Retrieved
from: http://proceedings.informingscience.org/InSITE2006/IISITSaad145.pdf.
Shih, H.-P. (2004). An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping on the Web. Information & Management, 41, 351e368.
Shyu, S. H., & Huang, J. (2011). Elucidating usage of e-government learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. Government
Information Quarterly, 28(4), 491e502. Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
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, 153e163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.020.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 561e570.
Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. L. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50(3), 838e852.
Retrieved from: https://library3.hud.ac.uk/summon/.
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273e315. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2),
186e204.
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),
425e478.
Williams, M., & Williams, J. (2009). Evaluating a model of business school students' acceptance of web-based course management systems. International
Journal of Management Education, 8(3), 59e70. http://dx.doi.org/10.3794/ijme.83.264.
Xuesong, Z., Olfman, L., & Firpo, D. (2011). An information systems design theory for collaborative ePortfolio systems. In 44th Hawaii International Con-
ference System Sciences (pp. 1e10).
Yang, S. C., & Lin, C. H. (2011). Factors affecting the intention to use Facebook to support problem-based learning among employees in a Taiwanese
manufacturing company. African Journal of Business Management, 5(22), 9014e9022. http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/AJBM11.1191.
Zare, H., & Yazdanparast, S. (2013). The causal Model of effective factors on intention to use of information technology among payamnoor and traditional
universities students. Life Science Journal, 10(2), 46e50. Retrieved from: http://www.lifesciencesite.com/lsj/life1002/008_B00896life1002_46_50.pdf.

Ching-Ter Chang received M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the department of Information Management, National Chiao Tung Uni-
versity, Taiwan, R.O.C. in 1992 and 1997. He is currently a full professor of Chang Gung University, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan, R.O.C. His
research interests include decision-making, supply chain management, mathematical programming, and digital applications. His
publications appear in several journals including IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems,
European Journal of Operational Research, Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, Omera, Transportation Research Part A,
Transportation Research Part E, Forest Ecology and Management, Annals of Forest Science, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research,
Neural Networks, Knowledge-based Systems, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Computers and Operations Research,
Computers and Industrial Engineering, International Journal of Production Economics, Applied Mathematical Modelling, Applied
Soft Computing, Engineering Computations, International Journal of Systems Science, Quality and Quantity, Asia-Pacific Journal of
Operational Research, Journal of Educational Computing Research, International Journal of advanced manufacturing technology,
Applied Mathematics and Computation and so on.
 C.-T. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 111 (2017) 128e143 143

Jeyhun Hajiyev is a Ph.D student in Graduate Institute of Business and Management, Chang Gung University in Taiwan and received
Master’s degree in College of Informatics, Department of Information Management at Yuan Ze University. His main research in-
terests cover the areas of e-learning, m-learning, e-government and customer online behavior.

Chia-Rong Su is a Ph.D. student in Graduate Institute of Business and Management, Chang Gung University in Taiwan and received
Master’s degree in Department of Information Management at St John’s University. His main research interests cover Information
security, MODM & MCDM, Big data analysis.