Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Factors predicting online university students’ use of a mobile learning management system (m-LMS)


This study analyzed the relationships among factors predicting online university students’ actual usage of a mobile learning management system (m-LMS) through a structural model. Data from 222 students in a Korean online university were collected to investigate integrated relationships among their perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, expectation-confirmation, satisfaction, continuance intention and actual usage of m-LMS. Results showed that perceived ease of use predicted perceived usefulness, but expectation-confirmation was not related to perceived usefulness. Perceived usefulness and expectation-confirmation predicted satisfaction. Perceived usefulness and satisfaction predicted continuance intention, but perceived ease of use was not related to continuance intention. Continuance intention predicted actual usage of m-LMS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4


  1. Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., & Todd, P. A. (1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 227–247.

  2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intention to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.

  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

  4. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

  5. Akour, H. (2010). Determinants of mobile learning acceptance: An empirical investigation in higher education (Doctoral dissertation). Stillwater: Oklahoma State University.

  6. Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college?: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pulishers.

  7. Berge, Z. L., & Muilenburg, L. Y. (2013). Handbook of mobile learning. New York: Routledge.

  8. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation- confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370.

  9. Chang, S. H. H., & Smith, R. A. (2008). Effectiveness of personal interaction in a learner-centered paradigm distance education class based on student satisfaction. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 407–426.

  10. Chen, B., Sivo, S., Seilhamer, R., Sugar, A., & Mao, J. (2013). User acceptance of mobile technology: A campus-wide implementation of mobile learn application. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(3), 327–343.

  11. 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.

  12. Chung, N., & Kwon, S. J. (2009). The effects of customers’ mobile experience and technical support on the intention to use mobile banking. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12(5), 539–543.

  13. Commission, Korea Communications Standards. (2011). Smartphone arena: 20 million users in Korea. Seoul: Korea Communications Standards Commission.

  14. Corbeil, J. R., & Valdes-Corbeil, M. E. (2007). Are you ready for mobile learning? EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 30(2), 51–58.

  15. Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Bull, S., & Chan, T. (2005). Evaluation of a mobile learning organizer for university students. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 21(3), 162–170.

  16. Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2014. Louisville: EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research.

  17. Dahlstrom, E., & Brooks, D. C. (2014). Study of faculty and information technology, 2014. Louisville: EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research.

  18. Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral dissertation). Cambridge: MIT Sloan School of Management.

  19. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

  20. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

  21. Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (1996). A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: Three experiments. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 45(1), 19–45.

  22. El-Hussein, M. O. M., & Cronje, J. C. (2010). Defining mobile learning in the higher education landscape. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 12–21.

  23. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

  24. Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26.

  25. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

  26. Hayashi, A., Chen, C., Ryan, T., & Wu, J. (2004). The role of social presence and moderating role of computer self-efficacy in predicting the continuance usage of e-learning systems. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(2), 139–154.

  27. Hong, S. J., Thong, J. Y. L., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). Understanding continued information technology usage behavior: A comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1819–1834.

  28. Hoppe, H. U., Joiner, R., Milrad, M., & Sharples, M. (2003). Guest editorial: Wireless and mobile technologies in education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 255–259.

  29. Huang, J. H., Lin, Y. R., & Chuang, S. T. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. The Electronic Library, 25(5), 586–599.

  30. Igbaria, M., & Livari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega, 23(6), 587–605.

  31. Industry, National I. T., & Agency, Promotion. (2013). Survey of Korean e-Learning Industry. Seoul: Information Technology Research & Development Business.

  32. Johnson, L., Adams, B. S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC horizon report: 2015 higher education edition. Retrieved from

  33. Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., & Chervany, N. L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 183–213.

  34. Kim, S. H. (2008). Moderating effects of job relevance and experience on mobile wireless technology acceptance: Adoption of a smartphone by individuals. Information & Management, 45(6), 387–393.

  35. Kinash, S., Brand, J., & Mathew, T. (2012). Challenging mobile learning discourse through research: Student perceptions of Blackboard mobile learn and iPads. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 639–655.

  36. King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 740–755.

  37. Kishton, J. M., & Widaman, K. F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling of questionnaire items: An empirical example. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 757–765.

  38. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York≪: Guilford Press.

  39. Korea Education and Research Information Service. (2012). White paper on ICT in education. Seoul: Korea Education and Research Information Service.

  40. Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012). How should the higher education workforce adapt to advancements in technology for teaching and learning? The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 247–254.

  41. Kukulska-hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2005). Mobile learning: A handbook for educators and trainers. New York: Routledge.

  42. Liaw, S. S., Hatala, M., & Huang, H. M. (2010). Investigating acceptance toward mobile learning to assist individual knowledge management: Based on activity theory approach. Computer & Education, 54(2), 446–454.

  43. Limayem, M., & Cheung, C. M. K. (2008). Understanding information systems continuance: The case of Internet-based learning technologies. Information & Management, 45(4), 227–232.

  44. Lin, C. S., Wu, S., & Tsai, R. J. (2005). Integrating perceived playfulness into expectation- confirmation model for web portal context. Information & Management, 42(5), 683–693.

  45. Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighting the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151–173.

  46. Liu, I., Chen, M., Sun, Y., Weble, D., & Kuo, C. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600–610.

  47. Liu, Y., & Han, S. (2010). Understanding the factors driving m-learning adoption: A literature review. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 27(4), 210–236.

  48. Looi, C., Sun, D., Wu, L., Seow, P., Chia, G., Wong, L., & Norris, C. (2014). Implementing mobile learning curricula in a grade level: Empirical study of learning effectiveness at scale. Computers & Education, 77, 101–115.

  49. Maniar, N., Bennett, E., Hand, S., & Allan, G. (2008). The effect of mobile phone screen size on video based learning. Journal of Software, 3(4), 51–61.

  50. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 173–191.

  51. McConatha, D., & Praul, M. (2008). Mobile learning in higher education: An empirical assessment of a new educational tool. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(3), 15–21.

  52. Ministry of Education Science and Technology. (2011). A project report selecting top online colleges to enhance the quality of competences. Seoul: Ministry of Education Science and Technology.

  53. Nguyen, L., Barton, S. M., & Nguyen, L. T. (2015). iPads in higher education-hype and hope. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 190–203.

  54. Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469.

  55. Oliver, R. L., & DeSarbo, W. S. (1988). Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 495–507.

  56. Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R. (2009). Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1285–1296.

  57. 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), 150–162.

  58. Peng, H., Su, Y., Chou, C., & Tsai, C. (2009). Ubiquitous knowledge construction: Mobile learning re-defined and a conceptual framework. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 46(2), 171–183.

  59. Pinkwart, N., Hoppe, H. U., Milrad, M., & Perez, J. (2003). Educational scenarios for the cooperative use of personal digital assistants. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 19(3), 383–391.

  60. Pituch, K., & Lee, Y. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education, 47(2), 222–244.

  61. Premkumar, G., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2008). Explaining information technology usage: A test of competing models. Omega, 36(1), 64–75.

  62. Quinn, C. (2001). Get ready for m-learning. Training and Development, 20(2), 20–21.

  63. Rai, A., Lang, S. S., & Welker, R. B. (2002). Assessing the validity of IS success models. Information Systems Research, 13(1), 50–59.

  64. Roca, J. C., & Gagne, M. (2008). Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1585–1604.

  65. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation. New York: Free Press.

  66. Sass, D. A., & Smith, P. L. (2006). The effects of parceling unidimensional scales on structural parameter estimates in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 13(4), 566–586.

  67. Sha, L., Looi, C.-K., Chen, W., & Zhang, B. H. (2009). Understanding mobile learning from the perspective of self-regulated learning. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 28(4), 366–378.

  68. Sharma, S. K., & Kitchens, F. L. (2004). Web services architecture for m-learning. Electronic Journal on e-Learning, 2(1), 203–216.

  69. Shin, N. (2003). Transactional presence as a critical predictor of success in distance learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 69–86.

  70. Shin, D. H., & Kim, S. (2012). An expectation-confirmation approach to the users’ continued use of smart phones. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 56(2), 331–356.

  71. Shin, D. H., Shin, Y. J., Choo, H., & Beom, K. (2011). Smartphones as smart pedagogical tools: Implications for smartphones as u-learning devices. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2207–2214.

  72. Spreng, R. A., MacKenzie, S. B., & Olshavsky, R. W. (1996). A reexamination of the determinants of consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 15–32.

  73. Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning?: An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183–1202.

  74. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information on technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.

  75. Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, S., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(9), 799–810.

  76. Traxler, J. (2007). Current state of mobile learning. International Review on Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2), 9–24.

  77. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.

  78. Vogel, D., Kennedy, D., & Kwok, R. D. W. (2009). Does using mobile device applications lead to learning? Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 20(4), 469–485.

  79. Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information Systems Research, 16(1), 85–102.

  80. Zhang, N., Guo, X., & Chen, G. (2007). Extended information technology initial acceptance model and its empirical test. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 27(9), 123–130.

Download references


This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant, funded by the Korean Government (#2012-045331).

Author information

Correspondence to Nari Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Joo, Y.J., Kim, N. & Kim, N.H. Factors predicting online university students’ use of a mobile learning management system (m-LMS). Education Tech Research Dev 64, 611–630 (2016).

Download citation


  • Mobile learning
  • Mobile learning management system
  • m-LMS
  • Actual usage
  • Technology acceptance model
  • Expectation-confirmation model