A Study on Student Behavioral Intentions to Use Tablet Personal Computer as Replacement of Textbook

8/13/2019 A Study on Student Behavioral Intentions to Use Tablet Personal Computer as Replacement of Textbook

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-study-on-student-behavioral-intentions-to-use-tablet-personal-computer-as 1/12

Online available since 2013/Dec/30 at www.oricpub.com© (2014) Copyright ORIC Publications

Journal of Human and Social Science ResearchVol. 2, No. 2 (2014), 45-56

webpage: http://www.oricpub.com/hssr-journal

H uman and S ocialS cience R esearch

HSSRVol. 2(2), 2014

ORIC Publications www.oricpub.com

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of ORIC

Publications, www.oricpub.com.

Keywords:

Tablet PCBehavioral IntentionUser Acceptance

Received: 03 Oct 2013

Accepted: 21 Dec 2013

Yeoh Sok FoonFaculty of Business and InformationScience, UCSI University, No. 1, JalanMenara Gading, UCSI Heights 56000Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Tan Lee TingFaculty of Business and InformationScience, UCSI University, No. 1, JalanMenara Gading, UCSI Heights 56000Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Benjamin Chan Yin-FahSenior Lecturer, Asia PacificUniversity of Technology andInnovation Research Associate,Institute of Gerontology, UniversitiPutra Malaysia

A Study on Student Behavioral Intentions to Use Tablet PersonalComputer as Replacement of Textbook

Corresponding Author: Yeoh Sok Foon

Faculty of Business and Information Science, UCSI University; [email protected]

Abstract

Tablet personal computer (PC) can be use as teaching and learning tool. A tool that can

improve study efficiency, yet not widely practice. This study aimed to investigate thefactors and determinants of behavioral intentions to use tablet personal computer (PC) as

replacement of textbook among university students. Theoretical foundation of this study

based on Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. A total of 240 respondents

were collected using multistage sampling. Results of correlation analyses show that

performance expectancy (r = 0.502, p < 0.01), effort expectancy (r = 0.431, p < 0.01),

attitude of using technology (r = 0.571, p < 0.01), social influence (r = 0.501, p < 0.01),

facilitating condition (r = 0.549, p < 0.01), self-efficacy (r = 0.556, p < 0.01) and anxiety (r

= -0.132, p < 0.01) were significantly related to behavioral intention to use tablet personal

computer as replacement for textbook. Results of multiple linear regressions showed that

attitude of using technology, facilitating condition, performance expectancy, self-efficacy,

and anxiety explained 53.6% variance of behavioral intention to use tablet PC asreplacement of textbook ( F = 40.512, p < 0.01). Implication and limitation of this study

also discussed.

1. INTRODUCTION

After the success of desktop computer, laptop computers have becoming

popular as it is easy for users to carry along to anywhere [10]. However,

laptop computer still has its weakness when come to the portability

requirement. The keyboard and the pointing devices such as mouse and

touch pad that use on the laptop becoming the significant problems for the

users. Nowadays, people are tend to focus one lighter and convenient and

hence the additional weight that come from the keyboard and external

device are of the important concern for the user. Ultimately, tablet personal

computer (tablet PC) have been designed and developed to solve these

issues. Since the tablet PC release in the year 2002, it has slowly gained

attention as a usefulness tool for educators, teachers and casual user [16].

According to Mark (2011), the tablet PC market has changed drastically

after the launched of Apple’s iPad [13]. Based on the Bernstein 2010

Research Report, Apple had sold out 3.3 million of iPad in its launch

quarter.

The implement of computer technology in the classroom or lecture hall will

improve the teaching (Barak, Lipson & Lerman, 2006) and make the

process of study more efficiency when used appropriately [2].



46 | A Study on Student Behavioral Intentions to Use Tablet Personal Computer as Replacement of Textbook

Journal of Human and Social Science Research / Vol. 2, No. 2

This shows that the college environment could be the best place for the adoption of tablet PC. In fact, there

are a lot of college already adopt this technology either for a lecturer to teach or for students use as a

replacement of the heavy textbook. For example, Notre Dame and Seton Hall University have put tablet PC

into the hands of faculty to examine their impact as a teaching tool (Mock, 2004) [16].

Early beginning of 1975 by Ajzen, there are few studies that focus and showing the acceptance or the

adoption of information technology [9]. These studies indicated that there is acceptance or adoption appears

in people when facing with the new information technologies. Davis has proposed two types of model that

review the human behavior and intention toward particular things, which is the Technologies Acceptance

Model (TAM) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. This study aims

to apply Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model to understand the student

intention to use tablet PC to replace textbook. This study aims to investigate the factors associated with

behavioral intention to use tablet PCs as a replacement of textbooks among university students.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Technology Acceptance Model and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model

Technology Acceptance Model (hereafter TAM) was developed because the user acceptance did not take

into account although there is numerous individual, organization, and technological variables have been

investigate in the research [4]. So, the TAM had been developed for researchers and participants to

investigate why a particular system may be unacceptable, and pursue appropriate corrective steps. TAM was

formed by using the theory of reasoned action (hereafter TRA) which firstly introduce by Azjen and

Fishbein (1975) [9]. Ajzen (1991) has state that the attitude and view of point of an individual toward a

situation was the influence by his/her beliefs [1]. Theory of planned behavior (hereafter TPB) was known as

the extent theory of reasoned action; it is a general behavior model to understand acceptance situation

compare to TAM model. TAM had replaced the first three attitudinal constructs (attitude towards the

behavior, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control) from the TPB with two variables to technology

acceptance (perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use) and it has gradually become the accepted model

especially for the social science researchers. According to EI-Gayar, Moran and Hawkes [8], TAM was

known as a useful tool in the education area for understanding and managing technology initiatives for

studying the technology acceptance.

However, TAM model is only able to predict 30 percent to 40 percent technology adoption of the users [18,

23]. Based on the situation, researchers had did a research and developed for another technology acceptance

model in order to achieve higher prediction [11, 20]. The modified model extended TAM model was knownas UTAUT Model, the model incorporates variables under demographic and social perspectives. In the

UTAUT model, performance expectance and effort expectancy were used to incorporate the constructs of

perceived usefulness and ease of use in the original TAM study [14]. According to Rosen, UTAUT model

measures the constructs of effort expectancy (similar to ease of use), performance expectancy (similar to

usefulness), social influence and facilitating conditions, it fails to measure individual traits, such as

innovativeness, that might help explain the acceptance and use of technology. The UTAUT model

hypothesize that the performance expectancy, social influence and effort expectancy, explained the

behavioural intention to use technology and actual usage in facilitating conditions [17]. Attitudes toward

using technology, self-efficacy, and anxiety are theorized not to be direct determinants of intention.



Y. S. Foon, T. L. Ting, B. C. Yin-Fah | 47

© ORIC Publications /2014

2.2. Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Social Influence, Facilitating Conditions, Attitude of using

Technology, Self-Efficacy and Anxiety

Performance expectancy (hereafter PE) was measured by the student believes that using the Tablet PCs will

help him or her to obtained the needed information from a printed textbook. The effect performance

expectancy was moderated by gender and age has led to biases. There is a research on gender differences

indicates than male tend to be highly task-oriented [15], performance expectancies, which focus on task

accomplishment, are likely to be especially prominent to male. Besides, Levy (1988) [12] suggests that

studies of gender differences can be misleading without reference to age. Effort expectancy (hereafter EE)

captures the concept of perceived ease of use and complexity where the ease of use is the second component

in the classic study [4] and is generally believed to have a significant influence on technology acceptance as

well as perceptions of usefulness. In the validation of the UTAUT, effort expectancy was momentous in

both voluntary and mandatory usage contexts, although only for the first period of usage. Three constructs

from the existing models capture the concept of effort expectancy: perceived ease of use (TAM/TAM2),

complexity (MPCU) and ease of use (IDT) [24].

Social Influence (hereafter SI) define as the consideration of the person's perception of the opinion of others,his or her reference group's subjective culture and specific interpersonal agreements with others, as well as

the degree to which use of an innovation is perceived to enhance one's image or status in one's social system

[26]. The role of social influence in technology acceptance decisions is complex and subject to a wide range

of contingent influences [23, 27]. Facilitating conditions (hereafter FC) refer to the availability of resources

needed to use which mean Tablet PCs and e-textbook in this study. According to Taylor and Todd (1995),

the facilitating conditions as a core component of perceived behavioural control [22].

Attitude of using technology defined as an individual’s overall affective reaction to using a system or

technologies. According to Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis (2003), four constructs from the existingalign closely with this definition which is the attitude toward behaviour (TRA, TPB/DTPB, C-TAM-TPB)

[26]. Intrinsic motivation, affect toward use and affect (SCT). Although self-efficacy and anxiety appeared

to be significant direct determinants of intention in SCT, UTAUT does not include them as direct

determinants [26]. There is previous study that has shown self-efficacy and anxiety to be conceptually and

empirically distinct from effort expectancy. Therefore, the self-efficacy and anxiety have been modeled as

indirect determinants of intention fully mediated by perceived ease of use [26]. Self-efficacy and anxiety

appear to be significant determinants of intention in SCT where without controlling for the effect of effort

expectancy. In conclude, it is expected that there might be a relationship between the self-efficacy and

anxiety with the university’s student acceptance of Tablet PCs as a replacement of textbooks.

2.3. The Concept of User Acceptance

User acceptance defined as the demonstrable willingness to use technology, for example, a worker use the

internet connection to watch drama in a work situation. According to Swanson and Sleezer (1988), users

often unwilling to use information system where it will be impressive in the result if been used [21].

Therefore, user acceptance also has been viewed as the key factor to determine if the information system is

success or failure [5]. Range of issues relate to user acceptance had been studied from characteristics of user

such as cognitive style (Huber) to internal beliefs and the impact of user acceptance on usage behaviour [7].

Therefore, acceptance has been reflected as the user participation in system and the process by which

technology is implemented, but yet it is still insufficient for researcher to predict user acceptance reliability[7].





2.4. Sampling and Location

Kuala Lumpur is the capital and the largest city in Malaysia, thus this study only focus on Kuala Lumpur.

Refer to Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (MOHE), about 17 public and private universities located in

Kuala Lumpur. There are 12 private universities which located at Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and

one university was randomly selected by the researchers to distribute the questionnaires. For the second

stage of sample selection, all the undergraduate students in the selected university are the sampling frame of

this study. Eighty students were recruited in respective year of one, two and three that permission granted

from respective lecturers.

2.5 Measurement of Variables

Instrument of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, attitude toward using technology, social influence,

facilitating conditions, self-efficacy, and anxiety were adapted from Moran [17] and assessed by five points

ordinal scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree”. The scores for each variable were then

been sum up to obtain the summation score. The greater the score indicates higher agreement towards the

targeted variables. The student behavioral intention in using tablet personal computer as replacement of

textbook were developed and measured using a single-measure item, “Would you agrees that replacingtextbooks with tablet PC?” Possible answer could be “Yes”, and “No’. In addition, a p ilot test of 30 students

been conducted before data collection to run reliability of the adapted instruments. IBM SPSS 19 as

statistical tool to analyze the collected data and to perform analyses to test hypotheses. Cronbach’s alpha

value (240 students) of performance expectancy is 0.613, effort expectancy is 0.740, attitude of using

technology is 0.764, social influence is 0.814, facilitating condition is 0.684 and behaviour intention is 0.643,

self efficacy is 0.829, anxiety is 0.774, and student acceptance is 0.739 respectively. All of the variables in

this research were considered as consistent because all of the Cronbach’ alpha was higher than 0.6 [3].

3. RESULTS

3.1. Profile of the Respondents

There were 240 respondents participated in this study. More than half of them are female respondents

(57.9%) and about 60 percent are local students while the remaining are international students. Nearly half

of the respondents (45.0%) began using computer or laptop during their secondary school followed by 36%

of respondents began to use laptop since elementary education and the remaining 19 percent began at

tertiary level of education. Majority of the respondents are studying business administration programme

(47.1%). More than half of the respondents (53.3%) are pursuing tablet PC to replace textbook for 2 subjects

or more. Besides that, the respondents agreed that they will use tablet PC to replace the textbooks (47.9%)

and it is a good option (40.4%) compared to those not agree with the statements are 27.5% and 28.3%respectively.

Generally, 66.6% of the respondents are agreed that “using tablet PC will enable them to accomplish task

more quickly” (PE1). Besides that, using tablet PC will help to increase their productivity (60.0%), PE3,

ease them to do their homework (67.6%), PE5, and would be useful in the class (69.6%). On the other hand,

there are 61.7% of respondents disagreed tablet PC will decrease their chance of getting good grade (PE9).

Majority of the respondents are agreed to the EE1 to EE6 (refer to Table 3) with the percentage of 68.3, 63.3,

60.5, 65.0, 59.2, and 71.7 respectively. This shows that tablet PC is easy to operate and easy to use in

performing their desired activities. The interaction of respondents with the tablet PC is flexible and clear. Asthey think it is easy to use, thus they agree that they will easily to become competent at using tablet PC. On

the other hands, nearly half respondents are disagreed to the statement EE7 (45.9%) and EE8 (45.4%) that

using “tablet PC takes too much of time from my normal duties and working with tablet PC is so





complicated and difficult to understand ”. For the attitude of using technology (AT), 74.6% of respondents

agreed using table PC is a good idea (AT1). In contrast, 59.1% of the respondents are disagreed they dislike

the idea of using tablet PC (AT2). In other words, they like the idea of using table PC. Generally, the

respondents are agreed with statement AT3 to AT6 which accounted for 54.1%, 62.1%, 76.2%, and 58.8%

respectively. This indicated that the respondents are agreed that using tablet PC is “pleasant, make

schoolwork more interesting, fun, and they like to work with tablet PC ”.

In detail to social influence (SI), majority of the respondents are neutral to all of the statements. However,

more students agree that people who influence their behaviour (32.9%), SI1, and important to them (25.9%),

SI2, might think they should use the tablet PC compared to those disagree only 16.3% and 20.0%

respectively. The respondents also think that using the tablet PC can improve prestige among lecturers

(30.4%) or students (29.6%). Student think the university has supported the use of tablet PC (28.3%), SI5,

and not agree that having tablet PC is a symbol in the university (30.0%), SI6. Generally, students are in

moderate level of self-efficacy (50.4% to 54.6%). Able to complete a task using Tablet PC if they had a lot of

time to complete the job was the statement that students agreed the most (54.6%), SE4. Followed by 53.4%

the respondents are confident that they can complete a task using tablet PC even if there is someone to helpwhen they got stuck (53.3%) and through demonstration or guidance (53.4%). On the other hand, about 51%

of the students agree that they have the resources and knowledge to use tablet PC (FC2). The students also

agree that using the Tablet PC fits into my work style (50.8%), FC4. In fact, they do have the resources

necessary to use Tablet PC (45.8%). Only minority of the students perceived that tablet PC is not compatible

with other computer system they currently use (28.3%).

In general, the students responded neutral for all the anxiety (AQ) statements (38.8% to 48.8%).

Comparatively of the level from disagree and agree, more of the respondents agree that they feel

apprehensive for using tablet PC (34.6%) and they will scare to lose their information when press the wrongkey on tablet PC or not (28.8%). Furthermore, students fear in making mistake that they cannot correct while

using the tablet PC or not (21.7%) and they feel hesitate that tablet PC is somewhat intimidating to them or

not (23.8%).

The students would like to use tablet PC for their studies frequently (61.7%). This explained their intention

to use tablet PC either for study or non-study use and if possible (60.9%). The students have intention to use

tablet PC in study if possible (58.8%). They perceived using tablet PC is voluntary (23.7%) and they do not

know if they would use tablet PC in next three month (42.9%). In addition, students using Tablet PC to learn

2 to 3 subjects averagely agree to replace textbook with Tablet PC (47.9%) and about 40% of the

respondents agree that the idea of replacing textbook is good.

3.2. Selected variables and behavioral intention of the respondents

In order to examine perceptional differences among the students, their responses were analyzed. Table 2

shows that there was significant difference between effort expectancy ( F =3.818, p < 0.05), attitude of using

technology ( F = 6.567, p < 0.05), social influence ( F = 5.398, p = 0.005), facilitating condition ( F = 5.245, p <

0.05), self-efficacy ( F = 4.203, p < 0.05) and anxiety ( F = 6.026, p < 0.05) at different level of study years.

A closer inspection, year 3 students has lower perceived anxiety compared to year 1 and year 2 students.

Further, performance expectancy was not significant difference between respondents’ education level ( F =

2.496, p > 0.05). The result shows that students who are more mature and experienced in learning have moreintention to use tablet personal computer as replacement for textbook.

There is a significant difference between social influence and nationality (t = -2.287, p < 0.05). The mean





social influence of international respondents ( M = 3.18) is slightly higher than local respondents ( M = 3.00).

This implies that the factor of social influence on international students is higher compared to local students.

However, there is no significant difference between performance expectancy (t = -0.465, p > 0.05), effort

expectancy (t = 1.148, p > 0.05), attitude of using technology (t = -1.329, p > 0.05), facilitating condition (t

= -1.158, p > 0.05), self-efficacy (t = -0.223, p > 0.05), anxiety (t = -1.735, p > 0.05) and behavioral

intention to use tablet personal computer as replacement for textbook (t = -0.565, p > 0.572) between

nationality of students. In conclusion, there is no difference on the selected factors compare to nationality of

students.

3.3. Correlations of the selected variables with behavioral intention to use tablet PC as replacement of textbook

and its determinants

Results of correlation analyses show that performance expectancy (r = 0.502, p < 0.01), effort expectancy (r

= 0.431, p < 0.01), attitude of using technology (r = 0.571, p < 0.01), social influence (r = 0.501, p < 0.01),

facilitating condition (r = 0.549, p < 0.01) and self-efficacy (r = 0.556, p < 0.01) were significantly related to

behavioral intention to use tablet personal computer as replacement for textbook. The relationship is positive

and moderate. However, anxiety (r = -0.132, p < 0.01) was negatively related to behavioral intention to usetablet personal computer as replacement for textbook, the strength is weak.

Multiple regression analysis was utilized in order to determine which of the selected independence variables

(performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, attitude of using technology, facilitating

condition, self-efficacy and anxiety) would influence the behaviour intention to use tablet PC as a

replacement of textbooks. The data are distributed more or less normally over all the variables (value of

skewness and kurtosis range between +1 to -1). Collinearity diagnostic has been performed to identify the

problems that might occur in the correlation matrix and result shows that the tolerance of each selected

variables ranging from 0.49 to 0.84 and value for variance inflation factor (VIF) for selected variablesranging from 1.20 to 1.84.

Looking into the multiple regression model, F (7, 232) = 40.512, 53.6% variance of the behavioral intention to

use tablet PC as replacement of textbook was explained by five predictors, namely: attitude of using

technology ( β = 0.256), facilitating condition ( β = 0.201), performance expectancy ( β = 0.206), self-efficacy

( β = 0.227), and anxiety ( β = -0.020). The final regression model produced by enters method for behavioral

intention to use tablet personal computer as replacement for textbook is:

Behavioral intention to use tablet personal computer as replacement for textbook = 0.58 + 0.289

Performance expectancy + 0.258 Attitude of using technology + 0.173 Facilitating condition + 0.194

Self-efficacy – 0.20 Anxiety

Figure 1 shows the obtained standardized beta coefficient value. This indicates that one standard deviation

increase in performance expectancy score brings 0.206 standard deviation increase in dependent variable

(behavioral intention to use tablet personal computer as replacement for textbook). Further, the influence of

Attitude of using technology ( β = 0.32) was the most influential than other predictors.





β = 0.206**

β = 0.256**

β = 0.201**

β = 0.227**

Performance expectancy

Attitude of using technology

Facilitating condition

Self-efficacy

Behavioral intention to use

tablet personal asreplacement for textbook

Anxiety β = - 0.113*

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level of significance

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level of significance

Figure1. Final model of behavioral intention to use tablet personal as replacement for textbook (N=240)

4. CONCLUSION

This research attempts to explore the empirical study of university’s student behavioral intention in using

tablet personal computer as replacement of textbook. In this study, regression analysis was used to measure

the influence of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and attitude of using technology, socialinfluence, facilitating condition, self-efficacy and anxiety with behavioral intention. However, the effort

expectancy (EE) and social influence is not significant predictor. This might due to the culture difference

between foreign cultures and local cultures. Different cultures have different perceptions and thinking of

accepting the tablet PC, therefore, the result in this study does not fit with the result from previous studies.

In term of limitation, the research results are limited because the male respondents and female respondents

for this research are not equally distributed. According to Venkatesh and Morris (2000), effort expectancy is

more important in women [24]. So, the results for this research may affected by the high participate of

female respondents. The other limitation is that the environment setting in the university. This is because

different environment may affect the students’ intention and perception toward the acceptance of technologyin the university [8]. Hence, it is important that future research to equally distribute between male and

female respondents to avoid the gender bias. This is because gender bias will affect on the self-efficacy for

acceptance on technology [24] although there got some other research such as research from Moran (2006)

got not affected by the gender bias as well [17]. Besides that, it is recommended that future research take the

environment of the university into account. This is because it may influence the students’ intention and

perception for using the tablet PC. Hence, it may affect the data and result for the research. It is suggested

that similar study should also extend to primary and secondary students as tablet PC was believed as

teaching tool that make study efficient.

Acknowledgement

We would like to express my appreciation to my students, Teo Wei Xiang and Sam Thean Lin for their help

in data collection.





REFERENCES

[1] Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50(2), 179 –

211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

[2] Barak, M., Lipson, A., & Lerman, S. (2006). Wireless laptop as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 245 – 263. Retrieved fromhttp://www.iste.org/Store/Product?ID=1473

[3] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences . Second Edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

[4] Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MISQuarterly, 13(3), 319 – 340. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2017067

[5] Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: Systems characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral

impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475-487. Retrieved from

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/30954/1/0000626.pdf

[6] Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User Acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two

theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982 – 1003. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982

[7] Dillon, A., & Morris, M. (1996). User acceptance of new information technology: theories and models. Annual Review of

Information Science and Technology, 31, 3-32. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~adillon/BookChapters/User%20acceptance.htm

[8] EI –Gayar, O., Moran, M., & Hawkes, M. (2011). Students’ acceptance of tablet PCs and implications for education

institutions. Education Technology & Society, 14(2), 58 – 70. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_2/5.pdf

[9] Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

[10] Ozok, A.A., Benson, D., Chakraborty, J., & Norcio, A.F. (2008). A comparative study between tablet and laptop PCs:

user satisfaction and preferences. Journal of human-computer interaction, 24(3), 329-352. doi:

10.1080/10447310801920524

[11] Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the

technology acceptance model. Information & Technology, 40(3), 191- 204. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00143-4

[12] Levy, J. A. (1988). Intersections of Gender and Aging. The Sociological Quarterly, 29(4), 479-486. doi:

10.1111/j.1533-8525.1988.tb01429.x

[13] Mark, P. (2011). The tablet trend. Business Traveller (UK/Europe Edition), 62 – 65.

[14] Marchewka, J.T., Liu,C., & Kostiwa, K. (2007). An Application of the UTAUT Model for Understanding Student

Perception Using Course Management Software. Communication of the IIMA. 7 (2), 92-104. Retrieved from

http://iima.org/CIIMA/13%20CIIMA%207-2-07%20Marchewka%2093-104.pdf[15] Minton, H. L., & Schneider, F. W. (1980). Differential psychology. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

[16] Mock, K. (2004). Teaching with tablet PC’s. Journal of Computing Science in Colleges, 20(2),17 – 27. Retrieved from

http://www.math.uaa.alaska.edu/~afkjm/papers/mock-ccsc2004.pdf

[17] Moran, M. J. (2006). College Student’s Acceptance of T ablet PCs and Application of the Unified Theory of AcceptanceTechnology (UTAUT) Model. (Doctoral dissertation, Capella University. Minnesota, USA). Retrieved from

http://www.homepages.dsu.edu/moranm/Research/Dissertation/Mark_Moran_Dissertation__final_.pdf

[18] Meister, D.B., & Campeau, D.R. (2002). Infusion of innovation adoption: an individual perspective. Annual conferenceof the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada (ASAC), Winnipeg, Manitoba: 23 – 33.http://libra.acadiau.ca/library/ASAC/v23/230403.pdf

[19] Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

http://www.iste.org/Store/Product?ID=1473


http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2017067





http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~adillon/BookChapters/User%20acceptance.htm


http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_2/5.pdf







http://libra.acadiau.ca/library/ASAC/v23/230403.pdf














[20] Plouffe, C.R., Hulland, J.S., & Vandenbosch, M. (2001). Research report: richness versus parsimony in modeling

technology adoption decisions – understanding merchant adoption of a smart card-based payment system. Information

Systems Research, 12(2), 208- 222. doi: 10.1287/isre.12.2.208.9697

[21] Swanson, R.A., & Sleezer, C.M. (1988). Information System Implementation: Bridging the Gap between Design and

C'tilizatlon, Irwin, Home - wood, IL.

[22] Taylor, S., & Todd, P.A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models, Information

Systems Research, 6 (2), 144 – 176. doi: 10.1287/isre.6.2.144

[23] Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field

studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186 – 204. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

[24] Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and

their role in technology acceptance and user behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115 – 139. doi: 10.2307/3250981

[25] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., & Ackerman, P. L. (2000). A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Differences in

Individual Technology Adoption Decision Making Processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

83(1), 33-60. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2896

[26] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified

view. MIS Quarterly, 27 (3), 425 – 478. doi: 10.2307/30036540

[27] Warshaw, P. R. (1980). A New Model for Predicting Behavioral Intentions: An Alternative to Fishbein. Journal of

Marketing Research, 17 (2), 153-172.doi: 10.2307/3150927





Appendix

Table 1. Descriptive results of respondent background (N=240)

Table 2. Results of bivariate analysis and mean score of the selected variables

Variables/Mean

score

ANOVA Independent Sample T-test

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 and

above

F Local International t

Performance

Expectancy

34.25 35.08 35.31 2.094 34.80 35.00 -0.465

Effort

Expectancy

26.34 27.48 27.71 3.818* 27.38 26.86 1.148

Attitude of using

Technology

21.06 22.00 22.65 6.567** 21.71 22.20 -1.329

Social Influence 17.66 19.43 18.14 5.398** 17.98 19.06 -2.287*

Facilitating

Condition

12.79 13.91 13.38 5.245** 13.22 13.57 -1.158

Self-Efficacy 16.64 17.46 17.89 4.203* 17.30 17.38 -0.223

Anxiety 11.80 11.46 12.83 6.026** 12.28 11.65 -1.735Behavioral

intention

16.48 17.25 17.55 4.397* 17.02 17.20 -0.565

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01

Variables n Percent (%)

Gender

Male 101 42.1

Female 139 57.9

Nationality

Local 145 60.4

International 95 39.4

Program of study

Biotechnology 3 1.3

Business Administration 113 47.1

Marketing 31 12.9

Other 93 38.8

Education level

Year 1 80 33.3

Year 2 80 33.3

Year 3 & above 80 33.3

Began using computer/laptop in university

Elementary 86 35.8

Middle 109 45.4

Higher 45 18.8





Table 3. Summary of Multiple Regression Analyses for the behavioral intention to use tablet PC as replacement of textbook

B SE B ß t Collinearity Statistics

Tolerance VIF

Constants .058 .261 0.221

Performance expectancy .289 .073 .206 3.942** .711 1.407

Effort expectancy .112 .058 .099 1.925 .730 1.370

Attitude Of UsingTechnology

.258 .058 .256 4.430** .582 1.718

Social Influence .010 .051 .012 .193 .486 2.057

Facilitating Condition .173 .051 .201 3.370** .545 1.835

Self-Efficacy .194 .046 .227 4.183** .656 1.524

Anxiety -.020 .009 -.113 -2.342* .839 1.192

F (7, 232) = 40.51, p < 0.01, R 2 = 0.550, ΔR

2 = 0.536; ** p < 0.01

Table 4: Itemize Questionnaires (Moran, 2006)

No. Using the Tablet PC in my classes would … …

PE1 Enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly.

PE2* Hamper my performance.

PE3 Would increase my productivity.

PE4* Hamper my effectiveness in class.

PE5 Make it easier to do my homework.

PE6* Hamper the quality of the work I do.

PE7 Because my classmate perceive me as competent.

PE8 Increase the instructors respect for me.

PE9* Decrease my chances of getting good grade.

PE10 Be useful in my classes.

EE1 Learning to operate the Tablet PC is easy for me.

EE2 I find it easy to get the Tablet PC to do what I want it to do

EE3 My interaction with Tablet PC would be clear and understandable.

EE4 I find the Tablet PC to be flexible to interact with.

EE5 It is easy for me to become skilful at using Tablet PC.

EE6 I find the Tablet PC easy to use.

EE7 Using the Tablet PC takes too much time from my normal duties.

EE8 Working with Tablet PC is so complicated, and difficult to understand.

AT1 Using the Tablet PC is good idea

AT2* I dislike the idea using the Tablet PC.

AT3 Using the Tablet PC is pleasant.

AT4 The Tablet PC makes schoolwork more interesting.AT5 Using the Tablet PC is fun.

AT6 I like working with Tablet PC.

SI1 People who influence my behaviour think that I should use the Tablet PC.

SI2 People who are important to me think that I should use the Tablet PC.

SI3 Using the Tablet PC can improve prestige among lecturers.

SI4 Using the Tablet PC can improve prestige among students.

SI5 In general, the university has supported the use of the Tablet PC.

SI6 Having the Tablet PC is a status symbol in my university.

FC1 I have the resources necessary to use Tablet PC.

FC2 I have the knowledge necessary to use the Tablet PC.

FC3 The Tablet PC is not compatible with other computer system I use.

FC4 Using the Tablet PC fits into my work style.

BI1 Whenever possible, I intend to use Tablet PC in my studies.

BI2 I perceive using the Tablet PC as Involuntary.




BI3 I plan to use the Tablet PC in the next three months.

BI4 To extend possible, I would use the Tablet PC to do different things (school or Not school) related.

BI5 To the extent possible, I would use the Tablet PC in my studies frequently.

SE1 I could complete a task using the Tablet PC if there was no one around to tell me what to do as I go.

SE2I could complete a task using the Tablet PC if I had seen someone else demonstrate how it could be

used.SE3 I could complete a task using the Tablet PC if I could call someone to help if I got stuck.

SE4 I could complete a task using the Tablet PC if I had a lot of time to complete the job.SE5 I could complete a task using the Tablet PC if I had just the built in help facility for assistance.

AQ1 I feel apprehensive about using the Tablet PC.

AQ2It scares me to think that I could lose a lot of information by using the Tablet PC and pressing thewrong key.

AQ3 I hesitate using the Tablet PC for fear of making mistake I cannot correct.

AQ4 The Tablet PC is somewhat intimidating to me.

* Negative statement

Documents

A Study on Student Behavioral Intentions to Use Tablet Personal Computer as Replacement of Textbook