905
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research article

Digital paradigm shift: Unraveling students’ intentions to embrace Tablet-based Learning through an extended UTAUT2 model

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Article: 2277340 | Received 27 Aug 2023, Accepted 26 Oct 2023, Published online: 09 Nov 2023

References

  • Addae, D., Amponsah, S., & Gborti, B. J. (2022). COVID-19 pandemic and the shift to digital learning: Experiences of students in a community college in Ghana. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 46(1–2), 101–33.
  • Aheto-Domi, B., Issah, S., & Dorleku, J. E. A. (2020). Virtual learning and readiness of tutors of colleges of education in Ghana. American Journal of Educational Research, 8(9), 653–658. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-8-9-6
  • Ahmad, J. (2016). Technology assisted language learning is a silver bullet for enhancing language competence and performance: A case study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(7), 118–131.
  • Akter, S., Fosso Wamba, S., & Dewan, S. (2017). Why PLS-SEM is suitable for complex modelling? An empirical illustration in big data analytics quality. Production Planning & Control, 28(11–12), 1011–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2016.1267411
  • Al-Adwan, A. S., Albelbisi, N. A., Hujran, O., Al-Rahmi, W. M., & Alkhalifah, A. (2021). Developing a holistic success model for sustainable e-learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Sustainability, 13(16), 9453. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169453
  • Al-Adwan, A. S., Yaseen, H., Alsoud, A., Abousweilem, F., & Al-Rahmi, W. M. (2022). Novel extension of the UTAUT model to understand continued usage intention of learning management systems: The role of learning tradition. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10758-y
  • Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2017). Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.002
  • Albahri, A. S., Alnoor, A., Zaidan, A. A., Albahri, O. S., Hameed, H., Zaidan, B. B., Peh, S. S., Zain, A. B., Siraj, S. B., Masnan, A. H. B., & Yass, A. A. (2022). Hybrid artificial neural network and structural equation modelling techniques: A survey. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 8(2), 1781–1801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-021-00503-w
  • Alshammari, S. (2021). Determining the factors that affect the use of virtual classrooms: A modification of the UTAUT model. Journal of Information Technology Education Research, 20, 117. https://doi.org/10.28945/4709
  • Ameen, N., & Willis, R. (2019). Towards closing the gender gap in Iraq: Understanding gender differences in smartphone adoption and use. Information Technology for Development, 25(4), 660–685. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2018.1454877
  • Ameri, A., Khajouei, R., Ameri, A., & Jahani, Y. (2020). Acceptance of a mobile-based educational application (LabSafety) by pharmacy students: An application of the UTAUT2 model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09965-5
  • Amid, A., & Din, R. (2021). Acceptance and use of massive open online courses: Extending UTAUT2 with personal innovativeness. Journal of Personalized Learning, 4(1), 57–66.
  • Ansong-Gyimah, K. (2020). Students’ perceptions and continuous intention to use E-Learning systems: The case of Google classroom. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJet), 15(11), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i11.12683
  • Appiah, K. M. (2022). A simplified model to enhance SMEs’ investment in renewable energy sources in Ghana. International Journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management, 35, 83–96. https://doi.org/10.54337/ijsepm.7223
  • Arenas-Gaitán, J., Peral Peral, B., & Ramón Jerónimo, M. (2015). Elderly and internet banking: An application of UTAUT2. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 20(1), 1–23.
  • Arpaci, I. (2016). Understanding and predicting students’ intention to use mobile cloud storage services. Computers in Human Behaviour, 58, 150–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.067
  • Arthur, F., & Kaku, D. W. (2020). The use of technology in the teaching of economics: Perspectives of economics students. GSJ, 8(8), 2906–2919. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francis-Arthur-8/publication/344101313_THE_USE_OF_TECHNOLOGY_IN_THE_TEACHING_OF_ECONOMICS_PERSPECTIVES_OF_ECONOMICS_STUDENTS/links/5fc9d573a6fdcc697bdb8f96/THE-USE-OF-TECHNOLOGY-IN-THE-TEACHING-OF-ECONOMICS-PERSPECTIVES-OF-ECONOMICS-STUDENTS.pdf
  • Awang, H., Rahman, A. A., Sukeri, S., Hashim, N., & Rashid, N. R. N. A. (2019). Adolescentfriendly health services in primary healthcare facilities in Malaysia and its correlation with adolescent satisfaction level. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 551–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2019.1685556
  • Ayasrah, F. T. M. (2020). Exploring E-Learning readiness as mediating between trust, hedonic motivation, students’ expectation, and intention to use technology in Taibah University. Journal of Education & Social Policy, 7(1), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.30845/jesp.v7n1p13
  • Baker, T. L. (1994). Doing social research (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Inc.
  • Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. The American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175.
  • Batsila, M. A., Tsihouridis, C. A., & Tsihouridis, A. H. (2017). “All for one and one for all”-creating a mobile learning net for ESP students’ needs. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 12(4), 17. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v12i04.6428
  • Bervell, B. B., Kumar, J. A., Arkorful, V., Agyapong, E. M., & Osman, S. (2022). Remodelling the role of facilitating conditions for Google classroom acceptance: A revision of UTAUT2. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7178
  • Bhimasta, R. A., & Suprapto, B. (2016). An empirical investigation of student adoption model toward mobile e-textbook: UTAUT2 and TTF model. In proceedings of the 2nd international conference on communication and information processing (pp. 167–173).
  • Boomaars, C., Yorks, L., & Shetty, R. (2018). Employee learning motives, perceived learning opportunities and employability activities. Journal of Workplace Learning, 30(5), 335–350. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-01-2018-0020
  • Brossard, M., Carnelli, M., Chaudron, S., DiGioia, R., Dreesen, T., Kardefelt-Winther, D. … Yameogo, J. L. (2021). Digital learning for every child: Closing the gaps for an inclusive and prosperous future. G20 Insights Policy Brief, September.
  • Cai, L., Yuen, K. F., Xie, D., Fang, M., & Wang, X. (2021). Consumer’s usage of logistics technologies: Integration of habit into the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Technology in Society, 67, 101789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101789
  • Chao, C. M. (2019). Factors determining the behavioural intention to use mobile learning: An application and extension of the UTAUT model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1652. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652
  • Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Cham, T. H., & Memon, M. A. (2019). The effect of selfie promotion and celebrity endorsed advertisement on decision-making processes: A model comparison. Internet Research, 29(3), 552–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0530
  • Chiu, J. L., Bool, N. C., & Chiu, C. L. (2017). Challenges and factors influencing initial trust and behavioural intention to use mobile banking services in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 11(2), 246–278. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-08-2017-029
  • Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Academic.
  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Technology acceptance model: TAM. Information Seeking Behavior and Technology Adoption.
  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132.
  • Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons.
  • 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, 452–465.
  • Dutton, K. (2018). Professional development: Investigating the relationships between employee motives, learning opportunities, and activities. Development & Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 32(5), 32–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-09-2018-127
  • Dzandza, P. E. (2020). Digitizing the intellectual output of Ghanaian universities. Collection and Curation, 39(3), 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1108/CC-05-2019-0012
  • Edem Adzovie, D., & Jibril, A. B. (2022). Assessment of the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the prospects of e-learning in higher learning institutions: The mediating role of academic innovativeness and technological growth. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2041222. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2041222
  • Feng, G. C., Su, X., Lin, Z., He, Y., Luo, N., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Determinants of technology acceptance: Two model-based meta-analytic reviews. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 98(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020952400
  • Fernandez, S. C., & Mammen, K. J. (2020). Perceptions of selected stakeholders on the use of tablets for University teaching. TEM Journal, 9(4), 1809. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM94-64
  • Fianu, E., Blewett, C., Ampong, G. O. A., & Ofori, K. S. (2018). Factors affecting MOOC usage by students in selected Ghanaian universities. Education Sciences, 8(2), 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8020070
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Don Mills.
  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2018). How to design and evaluate research in education. (10th ed.). McGraw Hill.
  • Furió, D., Juan, M. C., Seguí, I., & Vivó, R. (2015). Mobile learning vs. traditional classroom lessons: A comparative study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(3), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12071
  • Ghauri, P., Grønhaug, K., & Strange, R. (2020). Research methods in business studies. Cambridge University Press.
  • Giebelhausen, M., Lawrence, B., & Chun, H. H. (2020). Doing good while behaving badly: Checkout charity process mechanisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 172(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04413-3
  • Goto, J., & Munyai, A. (2022). The acceptance and use of online learning by law students in a South African University: An application of the UTAUT2 model. The African Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 3.
  • Gunawan, A., Muchardie, B. G., & Liawinardi, K. (2019). Millennial behavioural intention to adopt e-book using UTAUT2 model. In 2019 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech) (Vol. 1, pp. 98–102). IEEE.
  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Howard, M. C., & Nitzl, C. (2020). Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069
  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
  • Hair, J. F., Hult, T., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage.
  • Hair, J., Hult, T., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springers.
  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDA.2017.087624
  • Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.001
  • Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
  • Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2018). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equations modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.
  • Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004
  • Hameed, F., Qayyum, A., & Khan, F. A. (2022). A new trend of learning and teaching: Behavioural intention towards mobile learning. Journal of Computers in Education, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-022-00252-w
  • Hamzah, W. W., Yusoff, M., Ismail, I., & Yacob, A. (2020). The behavioural intentions of secondary school students to use tablet as a mobile learning device. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJim), 14(13), 161. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v14i13.13027
  • Hartelina, H., Batu, R., & Hidayanti, A. (2021). What can hedonic motivation do on decisions to use online learning services? International Journal of Data & Network Science, 5(2), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2021.2.002
  • 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, 115–135.
  • Hooda, A., Gupta, P., Jeyaraj, A., Giannakis, M., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2022). The effects of trust on behavioural intention and use behaviour within e-government contexts. International Journal of Information Management, 67, 102553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102553
  • Huang, X. (2018). Social media use by college students and teachers: An application of UTAUT2 (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).
  • Hussein, Z. (2017). Leading to intention: The role of attitude in relation to technology acceptance model in e-learning. Procedia Computer Science, 105, 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.01.196
  • Kabra, G., Ramesh, A., Akhtar, P., & Dash, M. K. (2017). Understanding behavioural intention to use information technology: Insights from humanitarian practitioners. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1250–1261.
  • Khalilzadeh, J., Ozturk, A. B., & Bilgihan, A. (2017). Security-related factors in extended UTAUT model for NFC based mobile payment in the restaurant industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 460–474.
  • Khrais, L. T., & Alghamdi, A. M. (2021). The role of mobile application acceptance in shaping e-customer service. Future Internet, 13(3), 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi13030077
  • Kock. (2021). WarpPLS user manual: Version 7.0. ScriptWarp Systems.
  • Kosiba, J. P. B., Odoom, R., Boateng, H., Twum, K. K., & Abdul-Hamid, I. K. (2022). Examining students’ satisfaction with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic-an extended UTAUT2 approach. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(7), 988–1005. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2022.2030687
  • Kumar, J. A., & Bervell, B. (2019). Google classroom for mobile learning in higher education: Modelling the initial perceptions of students. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1793–1817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-09858-z
  • Kurt, E. Ö., & Tingoy, Ö. (2017). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in higher education: An empirical study in Turkey, and the UK. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 1–15.
  • Langthaler, M., & Bazafkan, H. (2020). Digitalization, education and skills development in the global South: An assessment of the debate with a focus on sub-Saharan Africa (No. 28). ÖFSE Briefing Paper.
  • Laukkanen, T. (2016). Consumer adoption versus rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the Internet and mobile banking. Journal of Business Research, 69(7), 2432–2439.
  • Leow, L. P., Phua, L. K., & Teh, S. Y. (2021). Extending the social influence factor: Behavioural intention to increase the usage of information and communication technology-enhanced student-centered teaching methods. Educational Technology Research & Development, 69(3), 1853–1879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10017-4
  • Liu, D., & Guo, X. (2017). Exploring gender differences in acceptance of mobile computing devices among college students. Information Systems and E-Business Management, 15(1), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-016-0315-x
  • Matthews, L. M. (2017). Applying multi-group analysis in PLS-SEM: A step-by-step process. In H. Latan & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial least squares structural equation modeling – basic concepts, methodological issues and applications in press. Springer International Publishing AG.
  • Meet, R. K., Kala, D., & Al-Adwan, A. S. (2022). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of MOOC in generation Z using extended UTAUT2 model. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 10261–10283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11052-1
  • Memon, M. A., Salleh, R., Mirza, M. Z., Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Ahmad, M. S., & Tariq, A. (2020). Satisfaction matters: The relationships between HRM practices, work engagement and turnover intention. International Journal of Manpower, 42(1), 21–50. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-04-2018-0127
  • Memon, M. A., Ting, H., Cheah, J. H., Thurasamy, R., Chuah, F., & Cham, T. H. (2020). Sample size for survey research: Review and recommendations. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, 4(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.47263/JASEM.4(2)01
  • Ministry of Education. (2018a). Education strategic plan.
  • Mohan, M. M., Upadhyaya, P., & Pillai, K. R. (2020). Intention and barriers to use MOOCs: An investigation among the post graduate students in India. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 5017–5031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10215-2
  • Moon, S. J. (2021). Investigating beliefs, attitudes, and intentions regarding green restaurant patronage: An application of the extended theory of planned behaviour with moderating effects of gender and age. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 92, 102727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102727
  • Moorthy, K., Yee, T. T., T’ing, L. C., & Kumaran, V. V. (2019). Habit and hedonic motivation are the strongest influences in mobile learning behaviours among higher education students in Malaysia. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4432
  • Mubuke, F., Kutosi Masaba, A., Ogenmungu, C., & Mayoka Kituyi, G. Examining the effect of facilitating conditions as an imperative input in enhancing the intention to use mobile learning systems in universities. 2017.
  • Nassar, A. A., Othman, K., & Nizah, M. A. B. M. (2019). The impact of the social influence on ict adoption: Behavioural intention as mediator and age as moderator. The International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 9(11), 963–978. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i11/6620
  • Nisa, U. K., & Solekah, N. A. (2022). The influence of TAM, social influence, security relationship toward intention to use E wallet through attitude and trust. Iqtishoduna: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Islam, 18(1), 35–50.
  • Nouri, J., & Cerratto Pargman, T. (2016). When teaching practices Meet tablets’ affordances. Insights on the materiality of learning. In K. Verbert, M. Sharples, & T. Klobučar (Eds.), Adaptive and adaptable learning. EC-TEL 2016. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 9891, pp. 179–192). Springer.
  • Osei, H. V., Kwateng, K. O., & Boateng, K. A. (2022). Integration of personality trait, motivation and UTAUT 2 to understand e-learning adoption in the era of COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 10705–10730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11047-y
  • Owolabi, H. O., Ayandele, J. K., & Olaoye, D. D. (2020). A Systematic Review of Structural Equation Model (SEM). Open Journal of Educational Development (ISSN: 2734-2050), 1(2), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.52417/ojed.v1i2.163
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioural research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  • Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
  • Quaicoe, J. S., & Pata, K. (2018). Basic school teachers’ perspective to digital teaching and learning in Ghana. Education and Information Technologies, 23(3), 1159–1173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9660-8
  • Rahi, S., Ghani, M., Alnaser, F., & Ngah, A. (2018). Investigating the role of unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) in internet banking adoption context. Management Science Letters, 8(3), 173–186.
  • Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Sinkovics, N., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2023). A perspective on using partial least squares structural equation modelling in data articles. Data in Brief, 48, 109074.
  • Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH.
  • Roberts, R., Flin, R., Millar, D., & Corradi, L. (2021). Psychological factors influencing technology adoption: A case study from the oil and gas industry. Technovation, 102, 102219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102219
  • Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press.
  • Sarstedt, M., & Mooi, E. (2019). A concise guide to market research. The process, data, and methods using IBM SPSS statistics (2016 Saunders, M. N., & Townsend, K. eds, 3rd ed.) Springer.
  • Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Shaikh, A., & Nikooherafmaher, S. “The effects of digitalization on students’ learning experience after the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic”: A qualitative study on institutional and student behaviours because of disruptive digitalization after the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic. 2022.
  • Sharma, S. K., Gaur, A., Saddikuti, V., & Rastogi, A. (2017). Structural equation model (SEM)-neural network (NN) model for predicting quality determinants of e-learning management systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(10), 1053–1066. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2017.1340973
  • Shuhaiber, A. (2016). How facilitating conditions impact students’ intention to use virtual lectures? An empirical evidence. AICT, 2016, 79.
  • Songkram, N., Chootongchai, S., Osuwan, H., Chuppunnarat, Y., & Songkram, N. (2023). Students’ adoption towards behavioural intention of digital learning platform. Education and Information Technologies, 1–23.
  • Steil, A. V., de Cuffa, D., Iwaya, G. H., & Pacheco, R. C. D. S. (2020). Perceived learning opportunities, behavioural intentions and employee retention in technology organizations. Journal of Workplace Learning, 32(2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-04-2019-0045
  • Streletskaya, N. A., Bell, S. D., Kecinski, M., Li, T., Banerjee, S., Palm‐Forster, L. H., & Pannell, D. (2020). Agricultural adoption and behavioral economics: Bridging the gap. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 42(1), 54–66.
  • Svenningsson, J., Höst, G., Hultén, M., & Hallström, J. (2021). Students’ attitudes toward technology: Exploring the relationship among affective, cognitive and behavioral components of the attitude construct. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09657-7
  • Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2018). Mobile application adoption predictors: Systematic review of UTAUT2 studies using weight analysis. In Challenges and Opportunities in the Digital Era: 17th IFIP WG 6.11 Conference on e-Business, e-Services, and e-Society, I3E 2018, Kuwait City, Kuwait, October 30–November 1, 2018, Proceedings 17 (pp. 1–12). Springer International Publishing.
  • Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019). Use of ‘habit’ is not a habit in understanding individual technology adoption: A review of UTAUT2 based empirical studies. In Smart Working, Living and Organising: IFIP WG 8.6 International Conference on Transfer and Diffusion of IT, TDIT 2018, Portsmouth, UK, June 25, 2018, Proceedings, Portsmouth, UK (pp. 277–294). Springer International Publishing.
  • Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: A meta-analytic evaluation of UTAUT2. Information Systems Frontiers, 23(4), 987–1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10007-6
  • Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., Wamba, S. F., & Dwivedi, R. (2021). The extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2): A systematic literature review and theory evaluation. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 102269.
  • Tarhini, A., Alalwan, A. A., Cao, D., & Al-Qirim, N. (2021). Integrating emotional attachment, resource sharing, communication and collaboration into UTAUT2 to examine students’ behavioural intention to adopt social media networks in education. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 13(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2021.111588
  • Tarhini, A., Hone, K., Liu, X., & Tarhini, T. (2017). Examining the moderating effect of individual-level cultural values on users’ acceptance of E-learning in developing countries: A structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(3), 306–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1122635
  • Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(2), 137–155.
  • Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization, 125–143.
  • Twum, K. K., Ofori, D., Keney, G., & Korang-Yeboah, B. (2022). Using the UTAUT, personal innovativeness and perceived financial cost to examine student’s intention to use E-learning. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 13(3), 713–737. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-12-2020-0168
  • Utomo, P., Kurniasari, F., & Purnamaningsih, P. (2021). The effects of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating condition, and habit on behaviour intention in using mobile healthcare application. International Journal of Community Service & Engagement, 2(4), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.47747/ijcse.v2i4.529
  • Van der Sluis, L. E., & Poell, R. F. (2003). The impact on career development of learning opportunities and learning behaviour at work. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(2), 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1058
  • Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 157–178.
  • Wang, F., Wijaya, T. T., Habibi, A., & Liu, Y. (2022). Predictors influencing urban and rural Area students to use tablet computers as learning tools: Combination of UTAUT and TTF models. Sustainability, 14(21), 13965. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142113965
  • Yidana, M. B., & Arthur, F. (2023). Exploring economics teachers’ efficacy beliefs in the teaching of economics. Cogent Education, 10(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2222652
  • Yidana, M. B., Arthur, F., Ababio, B. T., & Yu, Z. (2022). Teachers’ application of multiple intelligences approach in teaching economics. Education Research International, 2022(2875555), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2875555
  • Yidana, M. B., Arthur, F., Kaku, D. W., & Anti Partey, P. (2023). Predictors of economics students’ behavioural intention to use tablets: A two-staged structural equation modelling-artificial neural network approach. Mobile Information Systems, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/9629405
  • Youssef, A., & Issam, E. I. (2022). Students’ adoption of e-learning: Evidence from a Moroccan business school in the COVID-19 era. Arab Gulf Journal of Scientific Research, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/AGJSR-05-2022-0052 54–78
  • Zacharis, G., & Nikolopoulou, K. (2022). Factors predicting University students’ behavioral intention to use eLearning platforms in the post-pandemic normal: An UTAUT2 approach with ‘learning value’. Education and Information Technologies, 27(9), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11116-2
  • Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2018). A systematic review of learning and teaching with tablets. International Association for Development of the Information Society.
  • Zhang, T., Tao, D., Qu, X., Zhang, X., Zeng, J., Zhu, H., & Zhu, H. (2020). Automated vehicle acceptance in China: Social influence and initial trust are key determinants. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 112, 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2020.01.027
  • Zheng, J., & Li, S. (2020). What drives students’ intention to use tablet computers: An extended technology acceptance model. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 101612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101612