Advertisement

Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning systems in Qatar and USA: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2)

  • Mazen El-Masri
  • Ali TarhiniEmail author
Cultural and Regional Perspectives

Abstract

This study examines the major factors that may hinder or enable the adoption of e-learning systems by university students in developing (Qatar) as well as developed (USA) countries. To this end, we used extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) with Trust as an external variable. By means of an online survey, data were collected from 833 university students from a university in Qatar and another from USA. Structural equation modelling was employed as the main method of analysis in this study. The results show that performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, habit and trust are significant predictors of behavioural intention (BI) in both samples. However, contrary to our expectation, the relationship between price value and BI is insignificant. Our results also show that effort expectancy and social influence lead to an increase in students’ adoption of e-learning systems in developing countries but not in developed countries. Moreover, facilitating conditions increase e-learning adoption in developed countries which is not the case in developing countries. Overall, the proposed model achieves an acceptable fit and explains its variance for 68% of the Qatari sample and 63% of the USA sample. These results and their implications to both theory and practice are described.

Keywords

E-learning Technology adoption UTAUT TAM Developing countries Qatar Structural equation modeling 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abbasi, M. S., Elyas, T., & Shah, F. (2015). Impact of individualism and collectivism over the individual’s technology acceptance behaviour: A multi-group analysis between Pakistan and Turkey. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(6), 747–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agudo-Peregrina, A. F., Hernandez-García, A., & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2013). Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 34(2), 301–314.Google Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Lal, B., & Williams, M. D. (2015). Consumer adoption of Internet banking in Jordan: Examining the role of hedonic motivation, habit, self-efficacy and trust. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 20(2), 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Al-Gahtani, S. S. (2016). Empirical investigation of e-learning acceptance and assimilation: A structural equation model. Applied Computing and Informatics, 12(1), 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. USA:Sloan Consortium. PO Box 1238, Newburyport, MA 01950.Google Scholar
  7. Alryalat, M., Williams, M. D., & Rana, N. P. (2013). Examining role of trust, security, social influence, and facilitating conditions on Jordanian citizen’s intention to adopt e-government systems, AMCIS 2013, Chicago.Google Scholar
  8. Al-Shafi, S., & Weerakkody, V. (2010). Factors affecting e-government adoption in the state of Qatar: Proceedings of the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Abu Dhabi. UAE, 12–13 April 2010.Google Scholar
  9. Alshare, K., & Mousa, A. (2014). The moderating effect of espoused cultural dimensions on consumer’s intention to use mobile payment devices. Thirty International Conference on Information Systems. Auckland.Google Scholar
  10. Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1265–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Alwi, N. H. M., & Fan, I. S. (2010). E-learning and information security management. International Journal of Digital Society (IJDS), 1(2), 148–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ambient Insights (2016). The 2015–2020 Worldwide Self-paced eLearning Market: Premium edition. http://www.ambientinsight.com/Reports/eLearning.aspx on February 10, 2016.
  13. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Arbuckle, J. (2009). Amos 18 user’s guide. Armonk: SPSS Incorporated.Google Scholar
  15. Arenas-Gaitán, J. O. R. G. E. (2015). Elderly and internet banking: An application of UTAUT2. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 20(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  16. Arpaci, I. (2015). A comparative study of the effects of cultural differences on the adoption of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 699–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The Legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a Proposal for a Paradigm Shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244–254.Google Scholar
  18. Banerjee, N., & Dey, A. K. (2013). Identifying the factors influencing users’ adoption of social networking websites: A study on Facebook. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 5(6), 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Baroud, F., & Abouchedid, K. (2010). E-learning in lebanon: Patterns of e-learning development in lebanon’s mosaic educational context. In U. Demiray (Ed.), E-learning practices: Cases on challenges facing elearning and national development, institutional studies and practices (pp. 409–424). Eskisehir-Turkey: Anadolu University.Google Scholar
  20. Blackboard Inc. (2012). Blackboard analytics and technology adoption. Retrieved from http://uki.blackboard.com/about-us/index.aspx.
  21. Brown, S. (2010). From VLEs to learning webs: The implications of Web 2.0 for learning and teaching. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). A model of adoption of technology in the household: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 29(4), 399–426.Google Scholar
  23. Browne, T., Jenkins, M., & Walker, R. (2006). A longitudinal perspective regarding the use of VLEs by higher education institutions in the United Kingdom. Interactive Learning Environments, 14(2), 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Carmines, E. G., & McIver, J. P. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables: Analysis of covariance structures. In G. W. Bohrnstedt & E. F. Borgatta (Eds.), Social measurement: Current issues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Chen, Y., Lin, Y., Yeh, R., & Lou, S. (2013). Examining factors affecting college students’ intention to use web-based instruction systems: Towards an integrated model. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(2), 111–121.Google Scholar
  27. Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education, 63(2), 160–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Chiu, C. M., & Wang, E. T. (2008). Understanding Web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information & Management, 45(3), 194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chu, T. H., & Chen, Y. Y. (2016). With good we become good: Understanding e-learning adoption by theory of planned behavior and group influences. Computers & Education, 92(1), 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004). Toward pre-prototype user acceptance testing of new information systems: Implications for software project management. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions, 51(1), 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2011). Self-determination theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, 1, 416–433.Google Scholar
  33. Docebo (2016). E-Learning Market Trends & Forecast 2014–2016 Report 3. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from https://www.docebo.com/landing/contactform/elearning-market-trends-and-forecast-2014-2016-docebo-report.pdf.
  34. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Chen, H., & Williams, M. D. (2011). A Meta-analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). In Governance and sustainability in information systems. Managing the transfer and diffusion of IT (pp. 155–170). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Dzunic, Z., Stoimenov, L., & Dzunic, M. (2011). Trust in eLearning systems based on virtual community of practice. Technics Technologies Education Management, 6(4), 1235–1245.Google Scholar
  36. El-Khatib, K., Korba, L., Xu, Y., & Yee, G. (2003). Privacy and security in e-learning. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), 1(4), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ennew, C., & Sekhon, H. (2007). Measuring trust in financial services: The trust index. Consumer Policy Review, 17(2), 62–68.Google Scholar
  38. Escobar-Rodríguez, T., & Carvajal-Trujillo, E. (2013). Online drivers of consumer purchase of website airline tickets. Journal of Air Transport Management, 32(4), 58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90.Google Scholar
  41. Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4(1), 2–77.Google Scholar
  42. Hair, F. J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A Global perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
  43. Hassan, M. A., & Fook, F. S. (2014). E-learning modules supported by cooperative learning: Impact on Arabic language achievement among Qatar University students. Near and Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education, 1(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
  44. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviours, institutions and organisations across nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  45. Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: UK, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  46. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Iskander, M. (Ed.), (2008). Innovative techniques in instruction technology, e-learning, e-assessment and education. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  48. Kamoun, F., & Almourad, M. B. (2014). Accessibility as an integral factor in e-government web site evaluation: The case of Dubai e-government. Information Technology & People, 27(2), 208–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kim, G., Shin, B., & Lee, H. G. (2009). Understanding dynamics between initial trust and usage intentions of mobile banking. Information Systems Journal, 19(3), 283–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lee, Y. H., Hsiao, C., & Purnomo, S. H. (2014). An empirical examination of individual and system characteristics on enhancing e-learning acceptance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(5), 561–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lewis, C. C., Fretwell, Ch., Ryan, J., & Parham, J. B. (2013). Faculty use of established and emerging technologies in higher education: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology perspective. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2), 22–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Li, N., & Kirkup, G. (2007). Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: A study of China and the UK. Computers & Education, 48(2), 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lin, H. M., Chen, W. J., & Nien, S. F. (2014a). The study of achievement and motivation by e-learning: A case study. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(5), 421–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lin, C. S., Tzeng, G. H., Chin, Y. C., & Chang, C. C. (2010). Recommendation sources on the intention to use e-books in academic digital libraries. The Electronic Library, 28(6), 844–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lin, S., Persada, S. F., & Nadlifatin, R. (2014b). A study of student behavior in accepting the blackboard learning system: A technology acceptance model (TAM) approach. In IEEE 18th international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design (pp. 457–462), 21–23 May 2014, China: Hsinchu.Google Scholar
  56. Lin, S., Zimmer, J. C., & Lee, V. (2013). Podcasting acceptance on campus: The differing perspectives of teachers and students. Computers & Education, 68, 416–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Luo, X., Li, H., Zhang, J., & Shim, J. P. (2010). Examining multi-dimensional trust and multi-faceted risk in initial acceptance of emerging technologies: An empirical study of mobile banking services. Decision Support Systems, 49(2), 222–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Marchewka, J. T., Liu, C., & Kostiwa, K. (2014). An Application of the UTAUT model for understanding student perceptions using course management software. Communications of the IIMA, 7(2), 93–104.Google Scholar
  59. Merhi, M. I. (2015). Factors influencing higher education students to adopt podcast: an empirical study. Computers & Education, 83(2), 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Morosan, C., & DeFranco, A. (2016). It’s about time: revisiting UTAUT2 to examine consumers’ intentions to use NFC mobile payments in hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 53, 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Musa, A., Khan, H. U., & AlShare, K. A. (2015). Factors influence consumers’ adoption of mobile payment devices in Qatar. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 13(6), 670–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Oechslein, O., Fleischmann, M., & Hess, T. (2014, January). An application of UTAUT2 on social recommender systems: Incorporating social information for performance expectancy. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3297–3306). IEEE.Google Scholar
  63. Oh, J. C., & Yoon, S. J. (2014). Predicting the use of online information services based on a modified UTAUT model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(7), 716–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Oye, N. D., Iahad, N. A., & Rahim, N. A. (2014). The history of UTAUT model and its impact on ICT acceptance and usage by academicians. Education and Information Technologies, 19(1), 251–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 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(1), 150–162.Google Scholar
  66. Phahlane, M.M., & Kekwaletswe, R.M. (2014). Management Information Systems use in higher education environments. March 21–22 In Proceedings of the Southern Association for Information Systems Conference. AIS, (pp. 1–6) Macon, GA, USA.Google Scholar
  67. Ramaiah, C.K. (2014). Emerging trends in electronic learning for library & information science professionals. In H.K. Kaul, Anurupa Naik & Sangeeta Kaul (Eds.), Knowledge, library and information networking (pp. 328–350). New Delhi: Developing Network.Google Scholar
  68. Raman, A., & Don, Y. (2013). Preservice teachers’ acceptance of learning management software: An Application of the UTAUT2 Model. International Education Studies, 6(7), 157–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Saadé, R., & Bahli, B. (2005). The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(2), 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sawang, S., Sun, Y., & Salim, S. A. (2014). It’s not only what I think but what they think! The moderating effect of social norms. Computers & Education, 76, 182–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44(1), 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). Structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). NY, USA: Routlege.Google Scholar
  73. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2011). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach (5th ed.). New Delhi: Wiley India Pvt. Ltd.Google Scholar
  74. Sharma, S. K., Joshi, A., & Sharma, H. (2016a). A multi-analytical approach to predict the Facebook usage in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 340–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sharma, S. K., Sarrab, M., & Al-Shihi, H. (2016b). Development and validation of Mobile Learning Acceptance Measure. Interactive Learning Environments. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2016.1224250.Google Scholar
  76. Tarhini, A., Arachchilage, N. A. G., Masa’deh, R., & Abbasi, M. S. (2015a). A critical review of theories and models of technology adoption and acceptance in information system research. International Journal of Technology Diffusion (IJTD), 6(4), 58–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tarhini, A., El-Masri, M., Ali, M., & Serrano, A. (2016a). Extending the UTAUT model to understand the customers’ acceptance and use of internet banking in Lebanon: A structural equation modeling approach. Information Technology and People, 29(4), 783–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tarhini, A., Hone, K., & Liu, X. (2015b). A cross-cultural examination of the impact of social, organisational and individual factors on educational technology acceptance between British and Lebanese university students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 739–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tarhini, A., Hone, K., Liu, X., & Tarhini, T. (2016b). 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. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2015.1122635.Google Scholar
  80. Tarhini, A., Teo, T., & Tarhini, T. (2016c). A cross-cultural validity of the E-learning acceptance measure (ElAM) in Lebanon and England: A confirmatory factor analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 21(5), 1269–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tella, A. (2012). System-related Factors that Predict Students’ Satisfaction with the Blackboard Learning System at the University of Botswana. African Journal of Library Archives and Information Science, 22, 41–52.Google Scholar
  82. Teo, T. (2009). The impact of subjective norm and facilitating conditions on pre-service teachers’ attitude toward computer use: A structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(1), 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Teo, T. (2015). Comparing pre-service and in-service teachers’ acceptance of technology: Assessment of measurement invariance and latent mean differences. Computers & Education. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.015.Google Scholar
  84. Teo, T., Luan, W. S., & Sing, C. C. (2008). A cross-cultural examination of the intention to use technology between Singaporean and Malaysian pre-service teachers: An application of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 265–280.Google Scholar
  85. Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers: A multi-group analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Thong, J. Y., Hong, S. J., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tosuntas, S. B., Karadag, B. E., & Orhan, S. (2015). The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers & Education, 81(2), 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D., & Morris, M. G. (2007). Dead or Alive? The Development, Trajectory and Future of Technology Adoption Research. Journal of the AIS, 8(4), 268–286.Google Scholar
  90. 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), 425–478.Google Scholar
  91. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.Google Scholar
  92. Venkatesh, V., & Zhang, X. (2010). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: uS vs. China. Journal of global information technology management, 13(1), 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Weber, A. S. (2010). Web-based learning in Qatar and the GCC States. Doha: Center for International and Regional Studies, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar.Google Scholar
  94. Williams, M., Rana, N., Dwivedi, Y., & Lal, B. (2011). Is UTAUT really used or just cited for the sake of it? A systematic review of citations of UTAUT’s originating article. In ECIS 2011 Proceedings (paper 231), 9–11 June, Finland: Helsinki.Google Scholar
  95. Wong, K.-T., Teo, T., & Goh, P. S. C. (2015). Understanding the intention to use interactive whiteboards: Model development and testing. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(6), 731–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Wu, B., & Zhang, C. (2014). Empirical study on continuance intentions towards Elearning 2.0 systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(10), 1027–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Yadav, R., Sharma, S. K., & Tarhini, A. (2016). A multi-analytical approach to understand and predict the mobile commerce adoption. Journal of Enterprise and Information Management, 29(2), 222–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Zhao, F., Scavarda, A. J., & Waxin, M.-F. (2012). Key issues and challenges in e-government development: An integrative case study of the number one eCity in the Arab world. Information Technology & People, 25(4), 395–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Business and EconomicsQatar UniversityDohaQatar
  2. 2.College of Economics and Political Science, Department of Information SystemsSultan Qaboos UniversityMuscatOman

Personalised recommendations