A new integrated model to explore factors that influence adoption of mobile learning in higher education: An empirical investigation

  • Faisal AburubEmail author
  • Ibrahim Alnawas


The aim of this paper is to test the combined effect of the key components of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and those of the Usage and Gratification Approach (U&G) on intention to adopt mobile learning in higher education. Data were collected from 820 students from ten universities in Jordan. Structural equation modeling (AMOS 18) was used to analyze the data. The findings of the current research reveal that perceived ease of use and cognitive gratification had the highest impact on intention to adopt mobile learning; perceived usefulness and hedonic gratification had the lowest effect; and personal integrative gratification had no effect. The key contribution of this research stems from the integration of two major theories into a broader conceptualization in order to test their combined effect on intention to adopt mobile learning in higher education.


Mobile learning TAM model U&G approach 



  1. Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for E-learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adegbija, M. V., & Bola, O. O. (2015). Perception of undergraduates on the adoption of Mobile Technologies for Learning in selected universities in Kwara state, Nigeria. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 352–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Almaiah, M., Jalil, M., and Man, M. (2016). Empirical investigation to explore factors that achieve high quality of mobile learning system based on students’ perspectives. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal. Article in Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ardi, P. (2017). Promoting learner autonomy through Schoology M-learning platform in an EAP class at an Indonesian University. Teaching English with Technology, 17(2), 55–76.Google Scholar
  6. Briz-Ponce, L., Pereira, A., Carvalho, L., Juanes-Méndez, J. A., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2017). Learning with mobile technologies–students’ behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 612–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Callum, K., & Jeffrey, L. (2014). Comparing the role of ICT literacy and anxiety in the adoption of mobile learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 8–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M., & Song, J. (2012). An investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1054–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education, 63, 160–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coursaris, C. K., & Kim, D. J. (2011). A meta-analytical review of empirical mobile usability studies. Journal of Usability Studies, 6(3), 117–171.Google Scholar
  11. Criollo-C, S., Luján-Mora, S. and Jaramillo-Alcázar, A., 2018. Advantages and Disadvantages of M-Learning in Current Education. In 2018 IEEE World Engineering Education Conference (EDUNINE) (pp. 1–6). IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2018). The use of mobile learning in higher education: A systematic review. Computers in Education, 123, 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dobos, J., & Dimmick, J. (1988). Factor analysis and gratification constructs. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 32(3), 335–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research (18:1), 39–50.Google Scholar
  17. Grissa, K., 2017. What “Uses and Gratifications” Theory Can Tell Us About Using Professional Networking Sites (EG LinkedIn, Viadeo, Xing, SkilledAfricans, Plaxo…). In International Conference on Digital Economy (pp. 15–28). Springer, Cham.Google Scholar
  18. Ha, Y. W., Kim, J., Libaque-Saenz, C. F., Chang, Y., & Park, M. C. (2015). Use and gratifications of mobile SNSs: Facebook and KakaoTalk in Korea. Telematics and Informatics, 32(3), 425–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, L. R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  20. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to international marketing (pp. 277–319). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  21. Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: A review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), E65–E70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. James, M. L., Wotring, C. E., & Forrest, E. J. (1995). An exploratory study of the perceived benefits of electronic bulletin board use and their impact on other communication activities. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 39(1), 30–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Joo, J., & Sang, Y. (2013). Exploring Koreans’ smartphone usage: An integrated model of the technology acceptance model and uses and gratifications theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2512–2518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Khan, A. I., Al-Shihi, H., Al-Khanjari, Z. A., & Sarrab, M. (2015). Mobile learning (M-learning) adoption in the Middle East: Lessons learned from the educationally advanced countries. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 909–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kutluk, F. A., & Gülmez, M. (2014). A research about mobile learning perspectives of university students who have accounting lessons. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 291–297.Google Scholar
  26. Lijanporn, S., & Khlaisang, J. (2015). The development of an activity-based learning model using educational mobile application to enhance discipline of elementary school students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1707–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu, S. H., Liao, H. L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3), 599–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Louis, R. S. (2006). Helping students become autonomous learners: Can technology help? Teaching English with Technology, 6(3).Google Scholar
  29. Mbarek, R., & El Gharbi, J. E. (2013). A meta-analysis of e-learning effectiveness antecedent. International journal of innovation and applied. Studies, 3(1), 48–58.Google Scholar
  30. Muhammed, A. A. (2014). The impact of mobiles on language learning on the part of English foreign language (EFL) university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 104–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Musa, A. S., Azmi, M. N. L., & Ismail, N. S. (2015). Exploring the uses and gratifications theory in the use of social media among the students of mass communication in Nigeria. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Muttoo, S., 2011. Mobile’changes in the Arab world. Retrieved October, 14, p.2012.Google Scholar
  33. Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2007). Interactions in virtual customer environments: Implications for product support and customer relationship management. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(2), 42–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nistor, N., Baltes, B., Dascălu, M., Mihăilă, D., Smeaton, G., & Trăuşan-Matu, Ş. (2014). Participation in virtual academic communities of practice under the influence of technology acceptance and community factors. A learning analytics application. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 339–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ordóñez de Pablos, P. ed., (2014). Assessing the role of mobile technologies and distance learning in higher education. IGI Global.Google Scholar
  36. Padilla-Meléndez, A., Del Aguila-Obra, A. R., & Garrido-Moreno, A. (2013). Perceived playfulness, gender differences and technology acceptance model in a blended learning scenario. Computers & Education, 63, 306–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Palmgreen, P. (1984). Uses and gratifications: A theoretical perspective. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 8, pp. 20–55). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A., & Rayburn, J. D. (1980). Relations between gratifications sought and obtained: A study of television news. Communication Research, 7(2), 161–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Park, N. (2010). Adoption and use of computer-based voice over internet protocol phone service: Toward an integrated model. Journal of Communication, 60(1), 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Persico, D., Manca, S., & Pozzi, F. (2014). Adapting the technology acceptance model to evaluate the innovative potential of e-learning systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 614–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pew Research Center, (2017). Mobile fact sheet. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech.Google Scholar
  42. Phang, C. W., Kankanhalli, A., & Sabherwal, R. (2009). Usability and sociability in online communities: A comparative study of knowledge seeking and contribution. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(10), 721–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pimmer, C., Mateescu, M., & Gröhbiel, U. (2016). Mobile and ubiquitous learning in higher education settings. A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 490–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pollara, P., & Broussard, K. K. (2011). Mobile technology and student learning: What does current research reveal?. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), 3(3), 34–42.Google Scholar
  45. Poushter, J. (2016). Smartphone ownership and internet usage continues to climb in emerging economies. Pew Research Center, 22, 1–44.Google Scholar
  46. Reychav, I., & Wu, D. (2014). Exploring mobile tablet training for road safety: A uses and gratifications perspective. Computers & Education, 71, 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Roca, J. C., Chiu, C. M. & Martínez, F.J. (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of human-computer studies, 64(8), 683–696.Google Scholar
  48. Rubin, A. M. (1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication, 34(3), 67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shin, D. H. (2011). Understanding e-book users: Uses and gratification expectancy model. New Media & Society, 13(2), 260–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shyu, S. H. P., & Huang, J. H. (2011). Elucidating usage of e-government learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. Government Information Quarterly, 28(4), 491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Soleimani, E., Ismail, K., & Mustaffa, R. (2014). The acceptance of mobile assisted language learning (MALL) among post graduate ESL students in UKM. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 457–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spiegel, A., & Rodríguez, G. (2016). Students at university have Mobile technologies. Do they do m-learning? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 846–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taleb, Z., & Sohrabi, A. (2012). Learning on the move: The use of mobile technology to support learning for university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1102–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tan, G. W. H., Ooi, K. B., Leong, L. Y., & Lin, B. (2014). Predicting the drivers of behavioral intention to use mobile learning: A hybrid SEM-neural networks approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre-service teachers' computer attitudes: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Utluk, F. A., & Gülmez, M. (2014). A research about mobile learning perspectives of university students who have accounting lessons. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Valero, C., Roura Redondo, M. and Sanchez Palacín, A. (2012). Tendencias actuales en el uso de dispositivos móviles en educación. La Educ@ción digital magazine, 147. Available at:Google Scholar
  58. Viberg, O., & Grönlund, Å. (2013). Cross-cultural analysis of users' attitudes toward the use of mobile devices in second and foreign language learning in higher education: A case from Sweden and China. Computers & Education, 69, 169–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wu, W. H., Wu, Y. C. J., Chen, C. Y., Kao, H. Y., Lin, C. H., & Huang, S. H. (2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 59(2), 817–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MIS DepartmentUniversity of PetraAmmanJordan
  2. 2.Marketing DepartmentQatar UniversityAl-dawhaQatar

Personalised recommendations