Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An empirical analysis of the determinants of mobile instant messaging appropriation in university learning

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research on technology adoption often profiles device usability (such as perceived usefulness) and user dispositions (such as perceived ease of use) as the prime determinants of effective technology adoption. Since any process of technology adoption cannot be conceived out of its situated contexts, this paper argues that any pre-occupation with technology acceptance from the perspective of device usability and user dispositions potentially negates enabling contexts that make successful adoption a reality. Contributing to contemporary debates on technology adoption, this study presents flexible mobile learning contexts comprising cost (device cost and communication cost), device capabilities (portability, collaborative capabilities), and learner traits (learner control) as antecedents that enable the sustainable uptake of emerging technologies. To explore the acceptance and capacity of mobile instant messaging systems to improve student performance, the study draws on these antecedents, develops a factor model and empirically tests it on tertiary students at a South African University of Technology. The study involved 223 national diploma and bachelor’s degree students and employed partial least squares for statistical analysis. Overall, the proposed model displayed a good fit with the data and rendered satisfactory explanatory power for students’ acceptance of mobile learning. Findings suggest that device portability, communication cost, collaborative capabilities of device and learner control are the main drivers of flexible learning in mobile environments. Flexible learning context facilitated by learner control was found to have a positive influence on attitude towards mobile learning and exhibited the highest path coefficient of the overall model. The study implication is that educators need to create varied learning opportunities that leverage learner control of learning in mobile learning systems to enhance flexible mobile learning. The study also confirmed the statistical significance of the original Technology Acceptance Model constructs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ally, M. (2009). Mobile learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bere, A. (2012). A comparative study of student experiences of ubiquitous learning via mobile devices and learner management systems at a South African university. In Paper presented at the 14th annual conference on world wide web applications, Mangosuthu University of Technology, Durban, 7–9 November 2012.

  • Bouhnik, D., & Deshen, M. (2014). WhatsApp goes to school: Mobile instant messaging between teachers and students. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 217–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, T., Sainter, P., & Saunders, G. (2013). Factors affecting faculty use of learning technologies: Implications for models of technology adoption. Journal of Computing in Higher education, 25(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C.-C., Yan, C.-F., & Tseng, J.-S. (2012). Perceived convenience in an extended technology acceptance model: Mobile technology and English learning for college students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 809–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). A knowledge engineering approach to developing mindtools for context-aware ubiquitors learning. Computers & Education, 54(1), 289–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, B., Vingerhoest, J., & Moonen, J. (1997). Flexiblility as a key construct in European training: Experiances from the tele scopia project. British Journal of educational Technology, 38(3), 475–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189–212.

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, A. (2011). Research at grass roots: For the social sciences and human service professions. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desai, C., & Graves, S. (2006). Instruction via instant messaging reference: What’s happening? The Electronic Library, 24(2), 174–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, W. R., & Goldstein, M. (1984). Multivariate analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dlodlo, N. (2015). Salient indicators of mobile instant messaging addiction with selected socio-demographic attributes among tertiary students in South Africa. South African Journal of Psychology. doi:10.1177/0081246314566022.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donkor, F. (2011). Assessment of learner acceptance and satisfaction with video-based instructional materials for teaching practical skills at a distance. The International Review of research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(5), 74–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Echeverría, A., Nussbaum, M., Calderón, J., Claudio Bravo, C., Infante, C., & Vásquez, A. (2011). Face-to-face collaborative learning supported by mobile phones. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(4), 351–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Gayar, O. F., Moran, M., & Hawkes, M. (2011). Students’ acceptance of tablet PCs and implications for educational institutions. Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 58–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitudes, intention, and behavior. An introduction to theory and research. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gan, C. L., & Balakrishnan, V. (2014). Determinants of mobile wireless technology for promoting interactivity in lecture sessions: An empirical analysis. Journal of Computing in Higher education, 26(2), 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., Black, B., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, J.-L., & Zhang, K. (2012). Examining mobile learning trends 2003–2008: A categorical meta-trend analysis using text mining techniques. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 24(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, W.-Y., Hsu, J.-L., Shadiev, R., Chang, C.-L., & Huang, Y.-M. (2015). Employing self-assessment, journaling, and peer sharing to enhance learning from an online course. Journal of Computing in Higher education, 27(2), 114–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Telecommunication Union. (2014). ICT facts and numbers. Retrieved March 9, 2016, from https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2014-e.pdf.

  • Iqbal, M. J., Kousar, N., & Ajmal, M. (2011). Collaborative learning: Myth for distance learning? International Journal of Academic Research, 3(4), 605–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs, S. (2012). Turning on mobile learning in Africa and Middle East. Retrieved February 1, 2016, from http://tostan.org/sites/default/files/resources/unesco_turning_on_mobile_learning_in_africa_and_the_middle_east.pdf.

  • Kalloo, V., & Mohan, P. (2012). MobileMath: An innovative solution to the problem of poor Mathematics performance in the Caribbean. The Caribbean Teaching Scholar, 2(1), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. Y. (2006). A survey on mobile-assisted language learning. Modern English Education, 7(2), 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, N. (2008). The subjective study effectiveness of u-learning. Doctoral of Philosophy Dissertation. South Korea: Mokwon University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, L. (2007). Unwillingness-to-communicate and college students’ motives in SMS mobile messaging. Telematics and Informatics, 24(2), 115–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Bowman, L. L. (2013). Use of instant messaging predicts self-report but not performance measures of inattention, impulsiveness, and distractibility. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(12), 898–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, T. T., & Li, L. (2014). Perceived characteristics, perceived popularity, and playfulness: Youth adoption of mobile instant messaging in China. China Media Research, 10(2), 60–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Looi, C. K., Seow, P., Zhang, B., So, H. J., Chen, W., & Wong, L. H. (2010). Leveraging mobile technology for sustainable seamless learning: A research agenda. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 154–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandeep, S. (2010). M-Learning: A new approach to learn better. International Journal of Education and Allied Sciences, 2(2), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean, M., & Gibbs, T. (2010). Twelve tips to designing and implementing a learner-centred curriculum: Prevention is better than cure. Medical Teacher, 32(3), 225–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng’ambi, D. (2006). Collaborative questioning: A case of short message services (SMS) for knowledge sharing. In Paper presented at the 6th international conference on advanced learning technologies. Kerkrade, 5–7 July 2006.

  • Nikou, S., & Bouwman, H. (2014). Ubiquitous use of mobile social network services. Telematics and Informatics, 31(3), 422–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, E., & Ohm, J. (2014). Factors influencing users’ employment of mobile map services. Telematics and Informatics, 31(2), 253–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, C. E., & Donthu, N. (2006). Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine internet usage. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(9), 999–1007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quan‐Haase, A., Cothrel, J., & Wellman, B. (2005). Instant messaging for collaboration: A case study of a high‐tech firm. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 10(4), 102–121.

  • Rambe, P., & Bere, A. (2013). Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner participation and transform pedagogy at a South African University of Technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 544–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, N., & Vänskä, R. (2011). Challenging assumptions: Mobile learning for mathematics project in South Africa. Distance Education, 32(2), 243–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shih, Y.-C., & Fan, S.-T. (2013). Adoption of instant messaging by travel agency workers in Taiwan: Integrating technology readiness with the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Business and Information, 8(1), 120–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shurville, S., O’Grady, T. B., & Mayall, P. (2008). Educational and instituational flexibility of Australian educational software. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 25(2), 74–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sim, J.-J., Tan, G. W.-H., Wong, J. C. J., Ooi, K.-B., & Hew, T.-S. (2014). Understanding and predicting the motivators of mobile music acceptance—A multi-stage MRA-artificial neural network approach. Telematics and Informatics, 31(4), 569–584. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2013.11.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sotillo, S. M. (2006). Using instant messaging for collaborative learning: A case study. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 2(3), 2–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statista. (2014). The statistics portal: Number of monthly active WhatsApp users worldwide from April 2013 to April 2014. Retrieved September 12, 2015, from http://www.statista.com/statistics/260819/number-of-monthly-active-whatsapp-users/.

  • Statista. (2016). Number of monthly active WhatsApp users worldwide from April 2013 to February 2016. Retrieved March 9, 2016, from http://www.statista.com/statistics/260819/number-of-monthly-active-whatsapp-users/.

  • Suki, N. M., & Suki, N. M. (2011). Users’ behavior towards ubiquitous M-Learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 12(3), 118–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, S. C., Hung, D., & Scardamalia, M. (2006). Education in the knowledge age—Engaging learners through knowledge building. In D. Hung & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Engaged Learning with Emerging Technologies (pp. 91–106). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, G. W. H., Ooi, K. B., Sim, J. J., & Phusavat, K. (2012). Determinants of mobile learning adoption: An empirical analysis. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 52(3), 82–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Techcrunch. (2015). Smartphone users globally by 2020, overtaking basic fixed phone subscriptions. Retrieved March 8, 2016, from http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/02/6-1b-smartphone-users-globally-by-2020-overtaking-basic-fixed-phone-subscriptions/.

  • Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among university students: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Computing in Higher education, 26(2), 124–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, A. B. (2004). Research skills for management studies. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traxler, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Innovative and sustainable mobile learning in Africa. In Paper presented at the 4th IEEE international workshop on wireless and mobile technologies in education, Athens, 16–17 November 2006.

  • Tselios, N. K., Daskalakis, S., & Papadopoulou, M. (2011). Assessing the acceptance of a blended learning university course. Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 224–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Charters, S., & Budgen, D. (2010). Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 52(2010), 463–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Chan, F. K., & Thong, J. Y. (2012). Designing e-government services: Key service attributes and citizens’ preference structures. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1), 116–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, M. R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Students perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WhatsApp. (2016). WhatsApp: how it works-simple, personal, real time messaging. Retrieved March 7, 2016, from https://www.whatsapp.com/.

  • Xiong, Y., So, H.-J., & Toh, Y. (2015). Assessing learners’ perceived readiness for computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL): A study on initial development and validation. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27(3), 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, H.-D., Kang, S., Oh, W., & Kim, M. S. (2011). Are all fits created equal? A nonlinear perspective on task-technology fit. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(12), 694–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, C., Jeong, C., & Rolland, E. (2014). Understanding individual adoption of mobile instant messaging: A multiple perspectives approach. Information Technology and Management, 16(2), 139–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business Information Systems Department, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, 445 Swanston Street, City Campus, Melbourne, VIC, 3001, Australia

    Aaron Bere

  2. Department of Business Support, Central University of Technology, Free State (CUT), Private Bag X20539, Bloemfontein, 9300, South Africa

    Patient Rambe

Authors
  1. Aaron Bere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patient Rambe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aaron Bere.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bere, A., Rambe, P. An empirical analysis of the determinants of mobile instant messaging appropriation in university learning. J Comput High Educ 28, 172–198 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9112-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9112-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation