IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i18p7532-d412692.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Derivation of Factors Influencing the Diffusion and Adoption of an Open Source Learning Platform

Author

Listed:
  • Chi-Yo Huang

    (Department of Industrial Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan)

  • Hui-Ya Wang

    (Department of Industrial Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan
    Department of Business Administration, Minghsin University of Science and Technology, Hsinchu 30076, Taiwan)

  • Chia-Lee Yang

    (National Center for High-performance Computing, No. 7, R&D Rd. VI, Hsinchu 30076, Taiwan)

  • Steven J. H. Shiau

    (National Center for High-performance Computing, No. 7, R&D Rd. VI, Hsinchu 30076, Taiwan)

Abstract

During the past two decades, open source learning platforms (OSLPs) have become a dominant part of modern education. OSLPs are free for usage and customization—unlike proprietary software restricted by copyright licenses. By utilizing OSLPs, users can download and use the source code, write new features, fix bugs, improve performances, or learn from others how specific problems can be solved. Albeit dominant, the frequency of usage and motivation of OSLPs by students is not high; however, there has been very little research about this, and the problem is significant. Therefore, this research aimed to derive the factors that affect the adoption and diffusion of OSLPs. The factors on the diffusion and adoption were defined based on the innovation diffusion theory (IDT) and the technology acceptance model (TAM), where the integrated theoretical framework is called the IDT-TAM. Partial Least Square structural equation modeling was used to confirm the hypothesized IDT-TAM. An empirical study was based on the sample data collected from 340 Taiwanese technical university students to demonstrate the feasibility of the analytical framework and derive the factors related to the adoption and diffusion of the OSLP for students. Based on the results of the empirical study, through the mediation of perceived attitude (PA) and perceived usefulness (PU), trialability (TL), observability (OS), ease of use (EU), and relative advantage (RA) are the factors most related to the diffusion and acceptance of the OSLP innovations. The analytical results can serve as the basis for the design, development, and enhancement of acceptance and diffusion of OSLP.

Suggested Citation

  • Chi-Yo Huang & Hui-Ya Wang & Chia-Lee Yang & Steven J. H. Shiau, 2020. "A Derivation of Factors Influencing the Diffusion and Adoption of an Open Source Learning Platform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-27, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7532-:d:412692
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7532/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7532/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee Fleming & David M. Waguespack, 2007. "Brokerage, Boundary Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 165-180, April.
    2. Gudergan, Siegfried P. & Ringle, Christian M. & Wende, Sven & Will, Alexander, 2008. "Confirmatory tetrad analysis in PLS path modeling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1238-1249, December.
    3. Saebi, Tina & Foss, Nicolai J., 2015. "Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 201-213.
    4. Kalliopi Kravari & Nick Bassiliades, 2015. "A Survey of Agent Platforms," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(1), pages 1-11.
    5. Rodolphe Durand & Jean-Philippe Bonardi, 2003. "Managing network effects in High-Tech Markets," Post-Print hal-02311703, HAL.
    6. Joel West & Karim Lakhani, 2008. "Getting Clear About Communities in Open Innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 223-231.
    7. Tsui-Yii Shih, 2014. "Key factors of marketing strategies of mobile service innovations," International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 16(4), pages 448-466.
    8. repec:dgr:rugccs:200311 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Bart van Ark & Robert Inklaar & Robert H. McGuckin, 2003. "ICT and Productivity in Europe and the United States Where Do the Differences Come From?," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 49(3), pages 295-318.
    10. Ark, Bart van & Inklaar, Robert & McGuckin, Robert H., 2003. "ICT and productivity in Europe and the United States," CCSO Working Papers 200311, University of Groningen, CCSO Centre for Economic Research.
    11. Christopher R. Plouffe & John S. Hulland & Mark Vandenbosch, 2001. "Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions—Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 208-222, June.
    12. Erumban, Abdul Azeez & de Jong, Simon B., 2006. "Cross-country differences in ICT adoption: A consequence of Culture?," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 302-314, December.
    13. Hamed Taherdoost, 2018. "A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories," Post-Print hal-03741843, HAL.
    14. Al-Qeisi, Kholoud & Dennis, Charles & Alamanos, Eleftherios & Jayawardhena, Chanaka, 2014. "Website design quality and usage behavior: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2282-2290.
    15. Lingling Gao & Kerem Aksel Waechter, 0. "Examining the role of initial trust in user adoption of mobile payment services: an empirical investigation," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    16. Kevin J. Boudreau & Lars B. Jeppesen, 2015. "Unpaid crowd complementors: The platform network effect mirage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1761-1777, December.
    17. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    18. Jarvis, Cheryl Burke & MacKenzie, Scott B & Podsakoff, Philip M, 2003. "A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 199-218, September.
    19. Surej P. John, 2015. "The integration of information technology in higher education: a study of faculty’s attitude towards IT adoption in the teaching process," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 60(5), pages 230-252, Octubre-D.
    20. Lingling Gao & Kerem Aksel Waechter, 2017. "Examining the role of initial trust in user adoption of mobile payment services: an empirical investigation," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 525-548, June.
    21. Premkumar, G. & Roberts, Margaret, 1999. "Adoption of new information technologies in rural small businesses," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 467-484, August.
    22. Steven J. H. Shiau & Chi-Yo Huang & Chia-Lee Yang & Jer-Nan Juang, 2018. "A Derivation of Factors Influencing the Innovation Diffusion of the OpenStreetMap in STEM Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-29, September.
    23. Zulfiqar Ali & Hongyi Sun & Murad Ali, 2017. "The Impact of Managerial and Adaptive Capabilities to Stimulate Organizational Innovation in SMEs: A Complementary PLS–SEM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-23, November.
    24. Marcel Bogers & Ann-Kristin Zobel & Allan Afuah & Esteve Almirall & Sabine Brunswicker & Linus Dahlander & Lars Frederiksen & Annabelle Gawer & Marc Gruber & Stefan Haefliger & John Hagedoorn & Dennis, 2017. "The open innovation research landscape: established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 8-40, January.
    25. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    26. Bagozzi, Richard P, 2000. "On the Concept of Intentional Social Action in Consumer Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(3), pages 388-396, December.
    27. Necmi K. Avkiran & Christian M. Ringle (ed.), 2018. "Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-3-319-71691-6, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gaofeng Wang & Changhoon Shin, 2022. "Influencing Factors of Usage Intention of Metaverse Education Application Platform: Empirical Evidence Based on PPM and TAM Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-21, December.
    2. David Méndez & Miriam Méndez & Juana María Anguita, 2022. "Digital Teaching Competence in Teacher Training as an Element to Attain SDG 4 of the 2030 Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Chi-Yo Huang & Min-Jen Yang & Jeen-Fong Li & Hueiling Chen, 2021. "A DANP-Based NDEA-MOP Approach to Evaluating the Patent Commercialization Performance of Industry–Academic Collaborations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-26, September.
    4. Chi-Yo Huang & Liang-Chieh Wang & Ying-Ting Kuo & Wei-Ti Huang, 2021. "A Novel Analytic Framework of Technology Mining Using the Main Path Analysis and the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory-Based Analytic Network Process," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-24, October.
    5. Jing Zhang & Zengzhao Chen & Jingjing Ma & Zhi Liu, 2021. "Investigating the Influencing Factors of Teachers’ Information and Communications Technology-Integrated Teaching Behaviors toward “Learner-Centered” Reform Using Structural Equation Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Jeng-Chieh Cheng & Jeen-Fong Li & Chi-Yo Huang, 2023. "Enablers for Adopting Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directives by Electronic Manufacturing Service Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-45, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhunzhun Liu & Shenglin Ben & Ruidong Zhang, 2019. "Factors affecting consumers’ mobile payment behavior: a meta-analysis," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 575-601, September.
    2. Lopes, Ana Paula Vilas Boas Viveiros & de Carvalho, Marly Monteiro, 2018. "Evolution of the open innovation paradigm: Towards a contingent conceptual model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 284-298.
    3. Riffat Ara Zannat Tama & Md Mahmudul Hoque & Ying Liu & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Mark Yu, 2023. "An Application of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to Examining Farmers’ Behavioral Attitude and Intention towards Conservation Agriculture in Bangladesh," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Siti Salwa Mohd Ishak & Sidney Newton, 2018. "Testing a Model of User Resistance Towards Technology Adoption in Construction Organizations," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1-27, December.
    5. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2006_032 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Sarstedt, Marko & Hair, Joseph F. & Cheah, Jun-Hwa & Becker, Jan-Michael & Ringle, Christian M., 2019. "How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 197-211.
    7. Humphrey M. Sabi & Faith-Michael E. Uzoka & Kehbuma Langmia & Felix N. Njeh & Clive K. Tsuma, 0. "A cross-country model of contextual factors impacting cloud computing adoption at universities in sub-Saharan Africa," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    8. Liébana-Cabanillas, Francisco & Marinkovic, Veljko & Ramos de Luna, Iviane & Kalinic, Zoran, 2018. "Predicting the determinants of mobile payment acceptance: A hybrid SEM-neural network approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 117-130.
    9. Barbara H. Wixom & Peter A. Todd, 2005. "A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 85-102, March.
    10. Damon E. Campbell & John D. Wells & Joseph S. Valacich, 2013. "Breaking the Ice in B2C Relationships: Understanding Pre-Adoption E-Commerce Attraction," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 219-238, June.
    11. Alberto Peralta & Luis Rubalcaba, 2021. "A Metagovernance Model of Innovation Networks in the Health and Social Services Using a Neo-Schumpeterian Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-23, June.
    12. Jaydeep Mukherjee, 2016. "A comprehensive framework for adoption of mobile broadband services in Indian cities," Asian Journal of Empirical Research, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 6(1), pages 9-25, January.
    13. Jun-Hwa Cheah & Hiram Ting & T. Ramayah & Mumtaz Ali Memon & Tat-Huei Cham & Enrico Ciavolino, 2019. "A comparison of five reflective–formative estimation approaches: reconsideration and recommendations for tourism research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 1421-1458, May.
    14. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    15. Dahlberg, Tomi & Öörni, Anssi, 2006. "Finnish consumers' expectations on developments and changes in payment habits : survey in connection with the research project "Finnish payment habits 2010"," Research Discussion Papers 32/2006, Bank of Finland.
    16. Andrew Burton-Jones & Allen S. Lee, 2017. "Thinking About Measures and Measurement in Positivist Research: A Proposal for Refocusing on Fundamentals," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 451-467, September.
    17. Yolande E. Chan & James S. Denford & Joyce Y. Jin, 2016. "Competing Through Knowledge and Information Systems Strategies: A Study of Small and Medium-Sized Firms," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-37, September.
    18. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & Ashutosh Patil, 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1865-1883, December.
    19. Kathryn L. Heinze & Justin E. Heinze, 2020. "Individual innovation adoption and the role of organizational culture," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 561-586, June.
    20. Allam, Hesham & Bliemel, Michael & Spiteri, Louise & Blustein, James & Ali-Hassan, Hossam, 2019. "Applying a multi-dimensional hedonic concept of intrinsic motivation on social tagging tools: A theoretical model and empirical validation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 211-222.
    21. Chin-Lung Hsu & Judy Chuan-Chuan Lin, 2020. "Understanding continuance intention to use online to offline (O2O) apps," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(4), pages 883-897, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7532-:d:412692. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.