[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3362789.3362886acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteemConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Personality traits and the intention to continue to use the Smart Learning Technologies: The role played by internal and external motivations in the relationship between the Big Five Personality Traits and the Intention to Continue to Use MOOCs (ICM)

Published: 16 October 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Smart Learning Technologies (SLT) transformed the relationship between the teacher and the student to be more student-centric teaching. However, the dropout rate of using SLT is prevailing. This research develops and tests a new psychological model to understand the role of the personality in continuing using the SLT. This study aims to examine the role of personality traits (i.e., agreeableness, extraversion, and conscientiousness) to understand the variances in the levels of intention to continue using the MOOCs (ICM) by taking into consideration external and internal motivations (i.e., those enforced by external sources and those stemming from self-motivation). After analysis on a sample of 136 students in Spanish universities using PLS path analysis, the internal motivation plays a significant full mediating role in understanding the relationship between the personality and intention to continue use for all except for the extraversion. Extraversion is externally motivated but no evidence to support the mediating impact nor the effect on the intention to continue use. None of the personality traits found to have a significant direct impact on ICM. Internal motivation, not external motivation, is found to influence the ICM significantly. This model explains 49% of the variation in ICM. The main implication of this research is that different personalities need different motivations for their use of SLT in order to keep using them in the future. Practical implications are developed to encourage student learning using SLT.

References

[1]
J. Wang, M. Jou, Y. Lv, and C.-C. Huang, "An investigation on teaching performances of model-based flipping classroom for physics supported by modern teaching technologies," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 84, pp. 36--48, Jul. 2018.
[2]
T. R. Liyanagunawardena, A. A. Adams, and S. A. Williams, "MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012," Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 14, no. 3, p. 202, Jul. 2013.
[3]
M. Gomez-Zermeno and L. Aleman, "Research Analysis on Mooc Course Dropout and R," Turkish Online J. Distance Educ., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 3--14, Apr. 2016.
[4]
K. F. Hew and W. S. Cheung, "Students' and instructors' use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges," Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 12, pp. 45--58, Jun. 2014.
[5]
Y. Lee, "Effect of uninterrupted time-on-task on students' success in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 86, pp. 174--180, Sep. 2018.
[6]
M. Jou, Y.-T. Lin, and D.-W. Wu, "Effect of a blended learning environment on student critical thinking and knowledge transformation," Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1131--1147, Aug. 2016.
[7]
Y. J. Joo, H. J. So, and N. H. Kim, "Examination of relationships among students' self-determination, technology acceptance, satisfaction, and continuance intention to use K-MOOCs," Comput. Educ., vol. 122, pp. 260--272, 2018.
[8]
M. Dečman, "Modeling the acceptance of e-learning in mandatory environments of higher education: The influence of previous education and gender," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 49, pp. 272--281, Aug. 2015.
[9]
N. Lung-Guang, "Decision-making determinants of students participating in MOOCs: Merging the theory of planned behavior and self-regulated learning model," Comput. Educ., vol. 134, pp. 50--62, Jun. 2019.
[10]
T. Kim, M. Yang, J. Bae, B. Min, I. Lee, and J. Kim, "Escape from infinite freedom: Effects of constraining user freedom on the prevention of dropout in an online learning context," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 66, pp. 217--231, Jan. 2017.
[11]
J. T. Jost and J. van der Toorn, "System justification theory," in Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, 2012, pp. 313--343.
[12]
N. Al-Qirim, K. Rouibah, A. Tarhini, M. A. Serhani, A. R. Yammahi, and M. A. Yammahi, "Towards a personality understanding of information technology students and their IT learning in UAE university," Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 29--40, 2018.
[13]
B. Wu and X. Chen, "Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 67, pp. 221--232, Feb. 2017.
[14]
K. M. Alraimi, H. Zo, and A. P. Ciganek, "Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation," Comput. Educ., vol. 80, pp. 28--38, 2015.
[15]
M. Zhou, "Chinese university students' acceptance of MOOCs: A self-determination perspective," Comput. Educ., vol. 92--93, pp. 194--203, Jan. 2016.
[16]
Y. hsun Tsai, C. hung Lin, J. chao Hong, and K. hsin Tai, "The effects of metacognition on online learning interest and continuance to learn with MOOCs," Comput. Educ., vol. 121, pp. 18--29, 2018.
[17]
M. G. Simmering, J. M. Arseneault, C. Ross, M. Sisic, E. S. Orr, and R. R. Orr, "Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 578--586, 2009.
[18]
B. Li, X. Wang, and S. C. Tan, "What makes MOOC users persist in completing MOOCs? A perspective from network externalities and human factors," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 85, pp. 385--395, Aug. 2018.
[19]
A. Littlejohn, N. Hood, C. Milligan, and P. Mustain, "Learning in MOOCs: Motivations and self-regulated learning in MOOCs," Internet High. Educ., vol. 29, pp. 40--48, Apr. 2016.
[20]
S. Zheng, M. B. Rosson, P. C. Shih, and J. M. Carroll, "Understanding Student Motivation, Behaviors and Perceptions in MOOCs," 2015, pp. 1882--1895.
[21]
R. Deng, P. Benckendorff, and D. Gannaway, "Progress and new directions for teaching and learning in MOOCs," Comput. Educ., vol. 129, pp. 48--60, 2019.
[22]
A. Watted and M. Barak, "Motivating factors of MOOC completers: Comparing between university-affiliated students and general participants," Internet High. Educ., vol. 37, pp. 11--20, Apr. 2018.
[23]
R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci, "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions," Contemp. Educ. Psychol., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 54--67, Jan. 2000.
[24]
J.-L. Wang, L. A. Jackson, D.-J. Zhang, and Z.-Q. Su, "The relationships among the Big Five Personality factors, self-esteem, narcissism, and sensation-seeking to Chinese University students' uses of social networking sites (SNSs)," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 2313--2319, Nov. 2012.
[25]
C. G. DeYoung, B. E. Carey, R. F. Krueger, and S. R. Ross, "Ten Aspects of the Big Five in the Personality Inventory for DSM-5," Personal. Disord. Theory, Res. Treat., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 113--123, 2016.
[26]
G. B. Svendsen, J.-A. K. Johnsen, L. Almås-Sørensen, and J. Vittersø, "Personality and technology acceptance: the influence of personality factors on the core constructs of the Technology Acceptance Model," Behav. Inf. Technol., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 323--334, Apr. 2013.
[27]
L. Langman and R. LeVine, Culture, Behavior and Personality., vol. 3, no. 2. Routledge, 2006.
[28]
C. Bratt, J. Sidanius, D. Abrams, J. van der Toorn, J. T. Jost, and V. Chaikalis-Petritsis, "Why Men (and Women) Do and Don't Rebel," Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 197--208, 2011.
[29]
S. Picazo-Vela, S. Y. Chou, A. J. Melcher, and J. M. Pearson, "Why provide an online review? An extended theory of planned behavior and the role of Big-Five personality traits," Comput. Human Behav., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 685--696, 2010.
[30]
C. G. DeYoung, "A cybernetic big five theory for personality psychology," Pers. Individ. Dif., vol. 60, p. S18, Apr. 2014.
[31]
D. Blackwell, C. Leaman, R. Tramposch, C. Osborne, and M. Liss, "Extraversion, neuroticism, attachment style and fear of missing out as predictors of social media use and addiction," Pers. Individ. Dif., vol. 116, pp. 69--72, Oct. 2017.
[32]
D. C. Feiler and A. M. Kleinbaum, "Popularity, Similarity, and the Network Extraversion Bias," Psychol. Sci., vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 593--603, May 2015.
[33]
E. A. Seemann, W. C. Buboltz, A. Thomas, B. Soper, and L. Wilkinson, "Normal personality variables and their relationship to psychological reactance," Individ. Differ. Res., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 88--98, 2005.
[34]
C. G. DeYoung, L. C. Quilty, and J. B. Peterson, "Between Facets and Domains: 10 Aspects of the Big Five," J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 93, no. 5, pp. 880--896, Aug. 2007.
[35]
C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error," J. Mark. Res., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39--50, Feb. 1981.
[36]
J. F. Hair, R. L. Tatham, R. E. Anderson, and B. William, Multivariate data analysis, 5th ed. New York: Prentice Hall, 1998.
[37]
P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J. Y. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff, "Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies," Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 88, no. 5. pp. 879--903, 2003.
[38]
M. B. Donnellan, F. L. Oswald, B. M. Baird, and R. E. Lucas, "The Mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality," Psychol. Assess., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 192--203, 2006.
[39]
R. A. Hudiburg, I. Pashaj, and R. Wolfe, "Preliminary Investigation of Computer Stress and the Big Five Personality Factors," Psychol. Rep., vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 473--480, Oct. 1999.
[40]
T. Barnett, A. W. Pearson, R. Pearson, and F. W. Kellermanns, "Five-factor model personality traits as predictors of perceived and actual usage of technology," Eur. J. Inf. Syst., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 374--390, Jul. 2015.
[41]
W. Wang, E. W. T. Ngai, and H. Wei, "Explaining Instant Messaging Continuance Intention: The Role of Personality," Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact., vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 500--510, Aug. 2012.
[42]
T. Zhou and Y. Lu, "The Effects of Personality Traits on User Acceptance of Mobile Commerce," Intl. J. Human-Computer Interact., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 545--561, 2011.
[43]
D. Liu and W. K. Campbell, "The Big Five personality traits, Big Two metatraits and social media: A meta-analysis," J. Res. Pers., vol. 70, pp. 229--240, 2017.
[44]
F. Mo, J. Zhou, M. Kosinski, and D. Stillwell, "Usage patterns and social circles on Facebook among elderly people with diverse personality traits," Educ. Gerontol., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 265--275, 2018.

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Consumers’ Intention to Use Drone Food Delivery Service: Belief-Desire-Intention Model and Big Five Personality Traits Approach2023 International Conference on Digital Applications, Transformation & Economy (ICDATE)10.1109/ICDATE58146.2023.10248449(188-192)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2023
  • (2023)Always connected @ work. Technostress and well-being with academicsComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2023.107675143:COnline publication date: 1-Jun-2023
  • (2021)Understanding Learner Continuance Intention: A Comparison of Live Video Learning, Pre-Recorded Video Learning and Hybrid Video Learning in COVID-19 PandemicInternational Journal of Human–Computer Interaction10.1080/10447318.2021.193838938:3(263-281)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Personality traits and the intention to continue to use the Smart Learning Technologies: The role played by internal and external motivations in the relationship between the Big Five Personality Traits and the Intention to Continue to Use MOOCs (ICM)

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    TEEM'19: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality
    October 2019
    1085 pages
    ISBN:9781450371919
    DOI:10.1145/3362789
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    In-Cooperation

    • University of Salamanca: University of Salamanca

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 16 October 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Intention to use
    2. MOOCs
    3. Motivation Theory
    4. Personality Traits
    5. Smart Learning Technologies

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    TEEM'19

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 496 of 705 submissions, 70%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)24
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 12 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Consumers’ Intention to Use Drone Food Delivery Service: Belief-Desire-Intention Model and Big Five Personality Traits Approach2023 International Conference on Digital Applications, Transformation & Economy (ICDATE)10.1109/ICDATE58146.2023.10248449(188-192)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2023
    • (2023)Always connected @ work. Technostress and well-being with academicsComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2023.107675143:COnline publication date: 1-Jun-2023
    • (2021)Understanding Learner Continuance Intention: A Comparison of Live Video Learning, Pre-Recorded Video Learning and Hybrid Video Learning in COVID-19 PandemicInternational Journal of Human–Computer Interaction10.1080/10447318.2021.193838938:3(263-281)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2021
    • (2019)Advances in Smart LearningProceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality10.1145/3362789.3362951(649-652)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2019

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media