IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8268-d856930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influencing Factors in MOOCs Adoption in Higher Education: A Meta-Analytic Path Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh

    (Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan 43400, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Samsilah Roslan

    (Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan 43400, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Zulkifli Mohamad

    (Pusat Pengajian Citra Universiti, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi 43600, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Ismi Arif Ismail

    (Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan 43400, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Habibah Ab Jalil

    (Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan 43400, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Seyedali Ahrari

    (Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan 43400, Selangor, Malaysia)

Abstract

(1) Background: Due to the rapid growth of Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs), higher educational institutions across the world are investing heavily in MOOCs to support their traditional teaching, their students’ learning experience, and their performance. However, the success of MOOCs highly depends on several factors that influence their success in higher education. Prior studies have attempted to investigate and predict user acceptance of MOOCs in higher education by using a variety of theoretical viewpoints. Nonetheless, these studies have yielded conflicting findings and are inconclusive. (2) Purpose: This study aims to develop a model that integrates the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), as well as the Task-Technology Fit (TTF) to explore the factors that influence the acceptance and use of MOOCs in higher education institutions, while synthesizing previous empirical findings in the field. (3) Methods: The model was tested using Meta-analytic Structural Equation Modelling (MASEM) based on the data gathered from 43 studies (k = 45 samples, n = 16,774). (4) Results: Effort expectancy (EE), attitude (ATT), performance expectancy (PE), and TTF—determined by several task and technology characteristics—were identified as the direct predictors of behavioral intention (BI) to continue using MOOCs. (5) Conclusions: This model provides a cohesive view of MOOCs’ acceptance in higher educational institutions, and it helps to identify potential research opportunities in this area. (6) Implications: Results from MASEM offer managerial guidance for the effective implementation of MOOCs and provide directions for further research, to augment current knowledge of MOOCs’ adoption, by higher education institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh & Samsilah Roslan & Zulkifli Mohamad & Ismi Arif Ismail & Habibah Ab Jalil & Seyedali Ahrari, 2022. "Influencing Factors in MOOCs Adoption in Higher Education: A Meta-Analytic Path Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-21, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8268-:d:856930
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8268/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8268/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liyong Wan & Shoumei Xie & Ai Shu, 2020. "Toward an Understanding of University Students’ Continued Intention to Use MOOCs: When UTAUT Model Meets TTF Model," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    2. Jinhua Chu & You-Yu Dai, 2021. "Extending the UTAUT Model to Study the Acceptance Behavior of MOOCs by University Students and the Moderating Roles of Free Time Management and Leisure-Study Conflict," International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), IGI Global, vol. 17(4), pages 35-57, October.
    3. Rajiv Sabherwal & Anand Jeyaraj & Charles Chowa, 2006. "Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1849-1864, December.
    4. Aida Ahmed Zahrani, 2021. "Exploring behaviour control and actual use of Massive Open Online Courses system management for education sustainability," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 9(1), pages 386-400, September.
    5. P.S. Vanitha & Sreejith Alathur, 2020. "E-learning adoption based on gender differences: insight from India," International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 28(4), pages 510-538.
    6. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    7. John D'Ambra & Concepción S. Wilson & Shahriar Akter, 2013. "Application of the task‐technology fit model to structure and evaluate the adoption of E‐books by Academics," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 48-64, January.
    8. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    9. William H. DeLone & Ephraim R. McLean, 1992. "Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 60-95, March.
    10. Ibrahim Youssef Alyoussef, 2021. "Massive Open Online Course (MOOCs) Acceptance: The Role of Task-Technology Fit (TTF) for Higher Education Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-14, July.
    11. Qing Wang & Muhammad Saqib Khan & Muhammad Kamran Khan, 2021. "Predicting user perceived satisfaction and reuse intentions toward Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in the Covid-19 pandemic," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 1-11, March.
    12. Emad A. Abu-Shanab & Sajida Musleh, 2018. "The Adoption of Massive Open Online Courses: Challenges and Benefits," International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), IGI Global, vol. 13(4), pages 62-76, October.
    13. Dale L. Goodhue, 1995. "Understanding User Evaluations of Information Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(12), pages 1827-1844, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Cecilia Temilola Olugbara & Moeketsi Letseka & Oludayo O. Olugbara, 2021. "Multiple Correspondence Analysis of Factors Influencing Student Acceptance of Massive Open Online Courses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Faulkner, Nicholas & Jorgensen, Bradley & Borg, Kim, 2017. "What encourages citizens to use e-government? A rapid review and comprehensive model," OSF Preprints e58bg, Center for Open Science.
    3. Zeng, Zhongping & Li, Siqi & Lian, Jiunn-Woei & Li, Jiang & Chen, Tao & Li, Yujia, 2021. "Switching behavior in the adoption of a land information system in China: A perspective of the push–pull–mooring framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Nripendra P. Rana & Anand Jeyaraj & Marc Clement & Michael D. Williams, 2019. "Re-examining the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a Revised Theoretical Model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 719-734, June.
    5. Marya Wani & Vishnupriya Raghavan & Dolphy Abraham & Virginia Kleist, 2017. "Beyond utilitarian factors: User experience and travel company website successes," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 769-785, August.
    6. Nathalie Demoulin & Kristof Coussement, 2018. "Acceptance of text-mining systems: The signaling role of information quality," Post-Print hal-02111772, HAL.
    7. Marya Wani & Vishnupriya Raghavan & Dolphy Abraham & Virginia Kleist, 0. "Beyond utilitarian factors: User experience and travel company website successes," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-17.
    8. Kuo-Yu Huang & Yea-Ru Chuang, 2016. "A task–technology fit view of job search website impact on performance effects: An empirical analysis from Taiwan," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1253943-125, December.
    9. Hasan, Rajibul & Lowe, Ben & Petrovici, Dan, 2020. "Consumer adoption of pro-poor service innovations in subsistence marketplaces," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 461-475.
    10. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    11. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    12. Pan Gong & Ningshuang Zeng & Kunhui Ye & Markus König, 2019. "An Empirical Study on the Acceptance of 4D BIM in EPC Projects in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Ivan De Battista & Franco Curmi & Emanuel Said, 2021. "Influencing Factors Affecting Young People’s Attitude Towards Online Advertising: A Systematic Literature Review," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 11(3), pages 58-72.
    14. Sabrina Cipolletta & Gabriela Rios Andreghetti & Giovanna Mioni, 2022. "Risk Perception towards COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Synthesis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-25, April.
    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. Queiroz, Maciel M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2019. "Blockchain adoption challenges in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in India and the USA," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 70-82.
    17. Marco Antonio Vieira da Silva & Thaís Moreira São-João & Valéria Cândido Brizon & Décio Henrique Franco & Fábio Luiz Mialhe, 2018. "Impact of implementation intentions on physical activity practice in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, November.
    18. Paul Zyambo & Felix K. Kalaba & Vincent R. Nyirenda & Jacob Mwitwa, 2022. "Conceptualising Drivers of Illegal Hunting by Local Hunters Living in or Adjacent to African Protected Areas: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-16, September.
    19. Jong Uk Kim & Rajiv Kishore, 2019. "Do we Fully Understand Information Systems Failure? An Exploratory Study of the Cognitive Schema of IS Professionals," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1385-1419, December.
    20. Morteza Ghobakhloo & Masood Fathi, 2019. "Modeling the Success of Application-Based Mobile Banking," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-21, November.

    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:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8268-:d:856930. 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.