DETERMINANTS OF MEDICAL STUDENT’S ATTITUDE TOWARD MOBILE ENGLISH LEARNING IN CHENGDU, CHINA
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aims to examine the factors influencing the attitudes and behavioral intentions of medical students in Chengdu, China, regarding their engagement in mobile English learning. The conceptual framework posits direct and indirect relationships among performance expectations (PE), social influence (SI), facilitating conditions (FC), perceived playfulness (PP), attitude (ATT), perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), and behavioral intention (BI). A quantitative survey was conducted involving 500 undergraduate medical students. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The findings indicate that attitude, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use are significant predictors of behavioral intention, with perceived usefulness exerting the strongest impact (β = 0.634, p < 0.001). Performance expectations, social influence, facilitating conditions, and perceived playfulness collectively account for 12.9% of the variance in attitude (R² = 0.129). Furthermore, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and attitude explain 43.9% of the variance in behavioral intention (R² = 0.439). The statistical results substantiate the seven research hypotheses and the final recommendations. To enhance the adoption of mobile English learning, it is recommended that institutions invest in reliable technological infrastructures, design user-friendly and interactive learning platforms, and promote positive social interactions to improve students' attitudes and behavioral intentions. Additionally, further studies are necessary to explore the long-term impact of mobile learning on academic performance and professional development, as well as to investigate the potential of emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence and virtual reality, in enhancing mobile learning experiences.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The owner of the article does not copy or violate any of its copyright. If any copyright infringement occurs or prosecution, in any case, the Editorial Board is not involved in all the rights to the owner of the article to be performed.
References
Afriani, R., & Syah, T. Y. R. (2019). Brand communications effect, brand images, and brand trust over loyalty brand building at PT Sanko Material Indonesia. Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic, 3(3), 44-50.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Al-Balas, M., Al-Balas, H. I., Jaber, H. M., Obeidat, K., Al-Balas, H., Aborajooh, E. A., Al-Taher, R., & Al-Balas, B. (2020). Distance learning in clinical medical education amid COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan: Current situation, challenges, and perspectives. BMC Medical Education, 20(1). DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02257-4
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.
Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., & Crompton, H. (2019). Mobile technology, learning, and achievement: Advances in understanding and measuring the role of mobile technology in education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60(1), 101827. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101827
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. DOI: 10.2307/249008
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). A Bayesian analysis of attribution processes. Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), 261-277. DOI: 10.1037/h0076477
Hair, J. F., Money, A. H., Samouel, P., & Page, M. (2007). Research methods for business. Education+Training, 49(4), 336–337. DOI: 10.1108/et.2007.49.4.336.2
Harter, H. L. (1960). Tables of range and studentized range. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 31(4), 1122–1147. DOI: 10.1214/aoms/1177705684
Jöreskog, K. G. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Scientific Software International.
Kaliisa, R., & Michelle, P. (2019). Mobile learning policy and practice in Africa: Towards inclusive and equitable access to higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 1–14. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.5562
Kang, M., Liew, B. Y. T., Lim, H., Jang, J., & Lee, S. (2015). Investigating the determinants of mobile learning acceptance in Korea using UTAUT2. In Emerging issues in smart learning (pp. 209-216). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6_29
Kearney, M., Schuck, S., Burden, K., & Aubusson, P. (2012). Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical perspective. Research in Learning Technology, 20(1), 14406. DOI: 10.3402/rlt.v20i0.14406
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. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2015.04.005
Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2005). Mobile learning: A handbook for educators and trainers. Routledge.
Macario, A., Harman, A. E., Hosansky, T., Post, M. E., Sun, H., & McMahon, G. T. (2019). Evolving board certification-glimpses of success. New England Journal of Medicine, 380(2), 115-118. DOI: 10.1056/nejmp1809322
Moon, J.-W., & Kim, Y.-G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a worldwide web context. Information & Management, 38(4), 217–230. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-7206(00)00061-6
Phogat, S., & Gupta, A. K. (2019). Evaluating the elements of just in time (JIT) for implementation in maintenance by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 36(1), 7-24. DOI: 10.1108/IJQRM-12-2017-0279
Rajprasit, K., & Hemchua, S. (2015). The English language & communication in the international workplace: An examination of Thai computer engineering professionals. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 21(3), 109-124.
Requero, B., Briñol, P., Moreno, L., Paredes, B., & Gandarillas, B. (2020). Promoting healthy eating by enhancing the correspondence between attitudes and behavioural intentions. Psicothema, 32(1), 60–66. DOI: 0.7334/psicothema2019.154
Sari, F. M. (2020). Exploring English learners’ engagement and their roles in the online language course. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 5(3), 349-361. DOI: 10.21462/jeltl.v5i3.446
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modelling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128(1), 13–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
Sharma, K., Aswal, C., & Paul, J. (2023). Factors affecting green purchase behavior: A systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 2078-2092. DOI: 10.1002/bse.3237
Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a theory of mobile learning. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Mobile Learning (mLearn 2005), 1(1), 1-9.
Steffens, N. K., Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Platow, M. J., Fransen, K., Yang, J., Ryan, M. K., Jetten, J., Peters, K., & Boen, F. (2014). Leadership as social identity management: Introducing the identity leadership inventory (ILI) to assess and validate a four-dimensional model. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 1001–1024. DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.05.002
Sun, J., Wang, Y., Miao, W., Wei, W., Yang, C., Chen, J., Yang, F., Ren, L., & Gu, C. (2023). A study on how to improve users’ perceived playfulness in and continuance intention with VR technology to paint in virtual natural landscapes. Heliyon, 9(5). DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16201
Sung, H.-N., Jeong, D.-Y., Jeong, Y.-S., & Shin, J.-I. (2015). The relationship among self-efficacy, social influence, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and behavioural intention in mobile learning services. International Journal of U- and E-Service, Science and Technology, 8(9), 197–206. DOI: 10.14257/ijunesst.2015.8.9.21
Tseng, T. H., Lin, S., Wang, Y. S., & Liu, H. X. (2022). Investigating teachers’ adoption of MOOCs: the perspective of UTAUT2. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(4), 635-650. DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1674888
Ullman, J. B., & Bentler, P. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling. In I. B. Weiner (Ed.), Handbook of psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 661–690). Wiley. DOI: 10.1002/9781118133880.hop202023
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. DOI: 10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & 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. DOI: 10.2307/41410412
Wang, Y., Zhou, Z., Zhao, Y., Bai, R., Wang, X., Sun, X., & Yan, H. (2017). Disparities in health burden, health-care facilities, and resources among countries in China's Belt and Road Initiative: A mixed methods study. The Lancet, 390(S85), 85. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33223-3
Yaşlıoğlu, M., & Yaşlıoğlu, D. T. (2020). How and when to use which fit indices? A practical and critical review of the methodology. Istanbul Management Journal, (88), 1-20. DOI: 10.26650/imj.2020.88.0001
