Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences

Published by: Kowsar

Modified Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology in Investigating Iranian Language Learners’ Attitudes Toward Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)

Rajab Esfandiari 1 , * and Fatemeh Sokhanvar 2
Authors Information
1 English Language Teaching, Department of English Language, Faculty of Humanities, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, IR Iran
2 English Language Teaching, Department of English Language, Faculty of Accounting and Management, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin branch, Qazvin, IR Iran
Article information
  • Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences: December 2015, 6 (4); e12010
  • Published Online: December 31, 2015
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: July 20, 2015
  • Revised: December 30, 2015
  • Accepted: December 24, 2015
  • DOI: 10.5812/ijvlms.12010

To Cite: Esfandiari R, Sokhanvar F. Modified Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology in Investigating Iranian Language Learners’ Attitudes Toward Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL), Interdiscip J Virtual Learn Med Sci. 2015 ; 6(4):e12010. doi: 10.5812/ijvlms.12010.

Abstract
Copyright © 2015, Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgements
Footnotes
References
  • 1. Wang YS, Wu MC, Wang HY. Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. Br J Educ Technol. 2009; 40(1): 92-118[DOI]
  • 2. Chen XB, Kessler G. Action research tablets for informal language learning: Student usage and attitudes. Language Learn Technol. 2013; 17(1): 20-36
  • 3. Cotter JJ, Gendron T, Kupstas P, Tartaglia A, Will L. Perceived Benefits of Mobile Learning Devices for Doctoral Students in a School of Allied Health Professions. J Allied Health. 2015; 44(4): 29-33
  • 4. Kukulska-Hulme A. Will mobile learning change language learning? ReCALL. 2009; 21(2): 157[DOI]
  • 5. Montrieux H, Vanderlinde R, Schellens T, De Marez L. Teaching and Learning with Mobile Technology: A Qualitative Explorative Study about the Introduction of Tablet Devices in Secondary Education. PLoS One. 2015; 10(12)[DOI][PubMed]
  • 6. Kukulska-Hulme A, Shield L. An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL. 2008; 20(3)[DOI]
  • 7. Hwang WY, Shih TK, Ma ZH, Shadiev R, Chen SY. Evaluating listening and speaking skills in a mobile game-based learning environment with situational contexts. Comput Assist Language Learn. 2016; 29(4): 639-57
  • 8. Hsu L. English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile assisted language learning: a cross-national study. Comput Assist Language Learn. 2013; 26(3): 197-213[DOI]
  • 9. Viberg O, Gronlund A. 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. Comput Educ. 2013; 69: 169-80[DOI]
  • 10. Mansouri S, Kaghazi B, Khormali N. A survey the views of the students of Gonbad Payam Noor University to mobile learning. The first Conference of mobile value-added services in Iran. 2011;
  • 11. Forooshani N, Khosravipour B, Yaghoubi J. A survey the views of the Agriculture organization experts of Khuzestan Province toward mobile educational systems. The fourth national conference and the first international conference on e-learning. 2010;
  • 12. Morsaei S, Yaghoubi J, Rajaei Y. A survey the views of the Managers of agricultural cooperatives toward mobile learning. International Conference on Electronic Citizenship and Mobile. 2011;
  • 13. Yaghoubi J, Baratali J. A survey of the role of mobile technologies in offering of electronic administrative services to the rural (Case study: Zanjan). The Second International Conference on Electronic Administrative System. 2010;
  • 14. Abdekhoda M, Ahmadi M, Hossini AF, Prikhani E, Farhadi A. Factors affecting information technology acceptance by health information management (HIM) staff of Tehran university of medical sciences’ hospitals based on the technology acceptance model (TAM) in 2011. J Payavard Salamat. 2013; 7(4): 287-98
  • 15. Esmaeili M, Eshlaghi AT, Ebrahimi AP, Esmaieli R. Study on feasibility and acceptance of implementation of Technology Acceptance Model of Davis in staff of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. Pajoohandeh J. 2013; 18(1): 40-5
  • 16. Sadeghitabar P, Shobeiri SM, Zakeri Z. Evaluation of the factors affecting implantation of mobile learning at continuing medical education program, using the theory reasoned action. Interdisciplinar J Virt Learn Med Sci. 2015; 6(2): 11-9
  • 17. Sheikholeslami V, Mohammad Eslami N, Gholipoor A. The investigation of mobile learning effectiveness on organizational behavior training. Manag Res. 2014; 27(8): 35-56
  • 18. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003; : 425-78
  • 19. Roca JC, Chiu CM, Martínez FJ. Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Int J Human Comput Stud. 2006; 64(8): 683-96[DOI]
  • 20. Sun PC, Tsai RJ, Finger G, Chen YY, Yeh D. What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Comput Educ. 2008; 50(4): 1183-202[DOI]
  • 21. Liao HL, Lu HP. The role of experience and innovation characteristics in the adoption and continued use of e-learning websites. Comput Educ. 2008; 51(4): 1405-16[DOI]
  • 22. Zhou T. Exploring Mobile User Acceptance Based on UTAUT and Contextual Offering. Proceedings of the 2008 International Symposium on Electronic Commerce and Security. 2008; : 241-5
  • 23. Entsieh AA, Emmelin M, Pettersson KO. Learning the ABCs of pregnancy and newborn care through mobile technology. Glob Health Act. 2015; 8(1): 29340[DOI]
  • 24. Pavon F, Brown I. Factors influencing the adoption of the World Wide Web for job-seeking in South Africa. SA J Inf Manag. 2010; 12(1)[DOI]
  • 25. Zhou T, Lu Y, Wang B. Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption. Comput Human Behav. 2010; 26(4): 760-7[DOI]
  • 26. Chen KY, Chang ML. User acceptance of ‘near field communication’ mobile phone service: an investigation based on the ‘unified theory of acceptance and use of technology’ model. Service Industries J. 2013; 33(6): 609-23[DOI]
  • 27. Adoption of mobile devices/services—searching for answers with the UTAUT. System Sciences, 2006. HICSS'06. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on. : 132a
  • 28. Lin S, Zimmer JC, Lee V. Podcasting acceptance on campus: The differing perspectives of teachers and students. Comput Educ. 2013; 68: 416-28[DOI]
  • 29. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Manag Sci. 2000; 46(2): 186-204[DOI]
  • 30. Moore GC, Benbasat I. Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Inf Systems Res. 1991; 2(3): 192-222[DOI]
  • 31. Balavivekanandhan A, Arulchelvan S. A Study on Students Acquisition of IT Knowledge and Its Implication on M-Learning. The Scientific World Journal. 2015; 2015: 1-11[DOI]
  • 32. Lopez-Nicolas C, Molina-Castillo FJ, Bouwman H. An assessment of advanced mobile services acceptance: Contributions from TAM and diffusion theory models. Inf Manag. 2008; 45(6): 359-64[DOI]
  • 33. Huang RT, Jang SJ, Machtmes K, Deggs D. Investigating the roles of perceived playfulness, resistance to change and self-management of learning in mobile English learning outcome. Br J Educ Technol. 2012; 43(6): 1004-15[DOI]
  • 34. Abar B, Loken E. Self-regulated learning and self-directed study in a pre-college sample. Learn Individ Differ. 2010; 20(1): 25-9[DOI][PubMed]
  • 35. Huang JH, Lin YR, Chuang ST. Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning. Electron Lib. 2007; 25(5): 585-98[DOI]
  • 36. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace1. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1992; 22(14): 1111-32[DOI]
  • 37. Igbaria M, Guimaraes T, Davis GB. Testing the Determinants of Microcomputer Usage via a Structural Equation Model. J Manag Inf Systems. 2015; 11(4): 87-114[DOI]
  • 38. Venkatesh V, Brown SA. A Longitudinal Investigation of Personal Computers in Homes: Adoption Determinants and Emerging Challenges. MIS Q. 2001; 25(1): 71[DOI]
  • 39. Yu J, Ha I, Choi M, Rho J. Extending the TAM for a t-commerce. Inf Manag. 2005; 42(7): 965-76[DOI]
  • 40. Moon JW, Kim YG. Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Inf Manag. 2001; 38(4): 217-30[DOI]
  • 41. Day-Black C, Merrill EB. Using Mobile Devices in Nursing Education. ABNF J. 2015; 26(4): 78-84[PubMed]
  • 42. Liao CH, Tsou CW. User acceptance of computer-mediated communication: The SkypeOut case. Expert Systems Appl. 2009; 36(3): 4595-603[DOI]
  • 43. Tao YH, Cheng CJ, Sun SY. What influences college students to continue using business simulation games? The Taiwan experience. Comput Educ. 2009; 53(3): 929-39[DOI]
  • 44. Terzis V, Economides AA. Computer based assessment: Gender differences in perceptions and acceptance. Comput Human Behav. 2011; 27(6): 2108-22[DOI]
  • 45. Celik H. What determines Turkish customers' acceptance of internet banking? Int J Bank Market. 2008; 26(5): 353-70[DOI]
  • 46. Hong JC, Hwang MY, Hsu HF, Wong WT, Chen MY. Applying the technology acceptance model in a study of the factors affecting usage of the Taiwan digital archives system. Comput Educ. 2011; 57(3): 2086-94[DOI]
  • 47. Venkatesh V, Bala H. Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sci. 2008; 39(2): 273-315[DOI]
  • 48. Davis R, Wong D. Conceptualizing and Measuring the Optimal Experience of the eLearning Environment. Decision Sci J Innov Educ. 2007; 5(1): 97-126[DOI]
  • 49. Sun H, Zhang P. An exploration of affect factors and their role in user technology acceptance: Mediation and causality. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2008; 59(8): 1252-63[DOI]
  • 50. Padilla-Melendez A, del Aguila-Obra AR, Garrido-Moreno A. Perceived playfulness, gender differences and technology acceptance model in a blended learning scenario. Comput Educ. 2013; 63: 306-17[DOI]
  • 51. Basoglu EB, AKDEMIR O. A comparison of undergraduate students' English vocabulary learning: Using mobile phones and flash cards. Turk Online J Educ Technol. 2010; 9(3)
  • 52. Ozok AA, Benson D, Chakraborty J, Norcio AF. A Comparative Study Between Tablet and Laptop PCs: User Satisfaction and Preferences. Int J Human Comput Interact. 2008; 24(3): 329-52[DOI]
Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:

Author(s):

Article(s):

Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments