IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i16p9329-d617707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interpreting Usability Factors Predicting Sustainable Adoption of Cloud-Based E-Learning Environment during COVID-19 Pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Bireswar Dutta

    (Department of Information Technology and Management, Taipei Campus, Shih Chien University, Taipei 10462, Taiwan)

  • Mei-Hui Peng

    (Institute of Information Management, National Yang-Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan
    Institute of Information Management, Minghsin University of Science and Technology, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan)

  • Chien-Chih Chen

    (Institute of Information Management, Minghsin University of Science and Technology, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan)

  • Shu-Lung Sun

    (Institute of Information Management, National Yang-Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan)

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic affected educational institutions in an unrivaled way around the globe and forced them to switch from conventional classroom learning mode to e-learning mode within a short time period. Neither instructors nor students had ample time to prepare. The purpose of the current study is to accomplish two objectives: to explore the functional relationship between attitudinal readiness (ATR), subjective well-being (SWB), and cloud-based e-learning adoption intention in Taiwan and examine the constancy of recommended proposed relationships among different students’ groups. The model was then empirically tested using data of 256 university students by structural equation modeling. The current study demonstrates that ATR is completely explained through four dimensions: peer reference, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and perceived ubiquity. SWB is positively interpreted through four dimensions: online course quality, system quality, perceived service quality, and perceived closeness. Self-efficacy has a significant relationship with both attitudinal readiness and adoption intention of a cloud-based e-learning system. Finally, the invariance test explores substantial variance among students who intend to use the system and students who reject it. Therefore, researchers and practitioners regarding educational, technological innovation must consider this empirical evidence to develop and validate a sustainable cloud-based e-learning program in higher education.

Suggested Citation

  • Bireswar Dutta & Mei-Hui Peng & Chien-Chih Chen & Shu-Lung Sun, 2021. "Interpreting Usability Factors Predicting Sustainable Adoption of Cloud-Based E-Learning Environment during COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9329-:d:617707
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9329/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9329/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Merhi, Mohamed & Hone, Kate & Tarhini, Ali, 2019. "A cross-cultural study of the intention to use mobile banking between Lebanese and British consumers: Extending UTAUT2 with security, privacy and trust," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Amanda M. Y. Chu & Connie K. W. Liu & Mike K. P. So & Benson S. Y. Lam, 2021. "Factors for Sustainable Online Learning in Higher Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Ravi Bapna & Akhmed Umyarov, 2015. "Do Your Online Friends Make You Pay? A Randomized Field Experiment on Peer Influence in Online Social Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1902-1920, August.
    4. Robert Caruana & Michal J. Carrington & Andreas Chatzidakis, 2016. "“Beyond the Attitude-Behaviour Gap: Novel Perspectives in Consumer Ethics”: Introduction to the Thematic Symposium," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 215-218, June.
    5. Sinan Aral & Dylan Walker, 2011. "Creating Social Contagion Through Viral Product Design: A Randomized Trial of Peer Influence in Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1623-1639, February.
    6. Deirdre Shaw & Robert McMaster & Terry Newholm, 2016. "Care and Commitment in Ethical Consumption: An Exploration of the ‘Attitude–Behaviour Gap’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 251-265, June.
    7. Felicia Huppert & Timothy So, 2013. "Flourishing Across Europe: Application of a New Conceptual Framework for Defining Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 837-861, February.
    8. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E M & Baumgartner, Hans, 1998. "Assessing Measurement Invariance in Cross-National Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(1), pages 78-90, June.
    9. Virginia Gewin, 2020. "Five tips for moving teaching online as COVID-19 takes hold," Nature, Nature, vol. 580(7802), pages 295-296, April.
    10. Yinxuan Huang, 2018. "The Dynamics of Online Activities and Its Impact on Well-Being in Urban China," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-17, June.
    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. Murad Abdu Saeed & Mohammed Abdullah Alharbi & Amr Abdullatif Yassin, 2021. "Sustaining Synchronous Interaction Effectiveness in Distance Writing Courses: A Mixed Method Study in a KSA University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Aiste Dirzyte & Živilė Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė & Jolita Šliogerienė & Aivaras Vijaikis & Aidas Perminas & Lukas Kaminskis & Giedrius Žebrauskas & Kęstutis Mačiulaitis, 2021. "Peer-to-Peer Confirmation, Positive Automatic Thoughts, and Flourishing of Computer Programming E-Learners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-24, October.

    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. Tianshu Sun & Sean J. Taylor, 2020. "Displaying things in common to encourage friendship formation: A large randomized field experiment," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 237-271, September.
    2. Ravi Bapna & Jui Ramaprasad & Galit Shmueli & Akhmed Umyarov, 2016. "One-Way Mirrors in Online Dating: A Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3100-3122, November.
    3. Jaehwuen Jung & Ravi Bapna & Joseph M. Golden & Tianshu Sun, 2020. "Words Matter! Toward a Prosocial Call-to-Action for Online Referral: Evidence from Two Field Experiments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 16-36, March.
    4. Lamberto Zollo, 2021. "The Consumers’ Emotional Dog Learns to Persuade Its Rational Tail: Toward a Social Intuitionist Framework of Ethical Consumption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(2), pages 295-313, January.
    5. Haris Krijestorac & Rajiv Garg & Vijay Mahajan, 2020. "Cross-Platform Spillover Effects in Consumption of Viral Content: A Quasi-Experimental Analysis Using Synthetic Controls," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 449-472, June.
    6. Miguel Godinho de Matos & Pedro Ferreira & Michael D. Smith & Rahul Telang, 2016. "Culling the Herd: Using Real-World Randomized Experiments to Measure Social Bias with Known Costly Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(9), pages 2563-2580, September.
    7. Sarah Gelper & Ralf van der Lans & Gerrit van Bruggen, 2021. "Competition for Attention in Online Social Networks: Implications for Seeding Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 1026-1047, February.
    8. John J. Horton & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2016. "The Causes of Peer Effects in Production: Evidence from a Series of Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 22386, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Zhihong Ke & De Liu & Daniel J. Brass, 2020. "Do Online Friends Bring Out the Best in Us? The Effect of Friend Contributions on Online Review Provision," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1322-1336, December.
    10. Mithila Guha & Daniel Korschun, 2024. "Peer effects on brand activism: evidence from brand and user chatter on Twitter," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 31(2), pages 153-167, March.
    11. Shan Huang & Sinan Aral & Yu Jeffrey Hu & Erik Brynjolfsson, 2020. "Social Advertising Effectiveness Across Products: A Large-Scale Field Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(6), pages 1142-1165, November.
    12. Uthman Alturki & Ahmed Aldraiweesh, 2021. "Application of Learning Management System (LMS) during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Sustainable Acceptance Model of the Expansion Technology Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-16, October.
    13. Hsing Kenneth Cheng & D. Daniel Sokol & Xinyu Zang, 2024. "The rise of empirical online platform research in the new millennium," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 416-451, March.
    14. Tianshu Sun & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2019. "Mobile Messaging for Offline Group Formation in Prosocial Activities: A Large Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2717-2736, June.
    15. Changseung Yoo & Eunae Yoo & Lu (Lucy) Yan & Alfonso Pedraza-Martinez, 2024. "Speak with One Voice? Examining Content Coordination and Social Media Engagement During Disasters," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 551-569, June.
    16. Katrine Kunst & Ravi Vatrapu, 2019. "Understanding electronic word of behavior: conceptualization of the observable digital traces of consumers’ behaviors," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(3), pages 323-336, September.
    17. Ni Huang & Gordon Burtch & Yumei He & Yili Hong, 2022. "Managing Congestion in a Matching Market via Demand Information Disclosure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1196-1220, December.
    18. Kajol, K. & Singh, Ranjit & Paul, Justin, 2022. "Adoption of digital financial transactions: A review of literature and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    19. Heiss, Florian & Ornaghi, Carmine & Tonin, Mirco, 2021. "Inattention vs switching costs: An analysis of consumers' inaction in choosing a water tariff," DICE Discussion Papers 366, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    20. Miguel Godinho de Matos & Pedro Ferreira & Rodrigo Belo, 2018. "Target the Ego or Target the Group: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Proactive Churn Management," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(5), pages 793-811, September.

    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:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9329-:d:617707. 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.