Tool Use in Computer-Based Learning Environments: Adopting and Extending the Technology Acceptance Model
Table 3
Decomposition effects for the entire sample for each hypothesis.
Hypotheses (H)
SE
Results
H1: perceived functionality ()
H1a: perceived usability
.66
.08
.62
8.23
.00
C
H1b: self-efficacy
−.16
.09
−.14
−1.86
.06
NC
H2: perceived usability ()
H2: self-efficacy
.17
.10
.16
1.71
.09
NC
H3: quantity of tool use ()
H3a: perceived functionality
−71.07
33.24
−.27
−2.14
.03
C*
H3b: perceived usability
93.46
35.32
.33
2.65
.01
C
H4: quality of tool use ()
H4a: perceived functionality
−.17
.29
−.08
−.61
.55
NC
H4b: perceived usability
−.35
.31
−.15
−1.14
.26
NC
H5: performance ()
H5a: quantity of tool use
.00
.00
.29
3.03
.00
C
H5b: quality of tool use
.16
.10
.16
1.59
.11
NC
Notes. C: confirmed; NC: not confirmed. Our hypothesis indicated that the relationship between perceived functionality and quantity of tool use would be positive. The found effects were significant but negative.
